you know, i might be able to win a case on reasonableness, anyways.
i would rather have the court consider correctness.
but,
i guess the truth is that they're going to make that choice based on
existing case law, and i don't even really get the benefit of a
presentation. i'm going to throw all this shit down on the table, and
they're the ones that are going to determine the correct standard of
review.
reasonableness is supposed to provide for a lot
of deference. but, it's not total. it needs to look at whether the
ruling falls into a reasonable set of possible outcomes. the idea is
that the court can set up a kind of multivalued function, but it's not
supposed to pass judgement on the outcome, so long as it falls into the
correct range it's defined in the mapping. but, it has to define the
mapping, first. and, if i can convince the judge that the legislation is
such that this outcome is outside of the proper mapping - because the
adjudicator misinterpreted the evidence - then i could conceivably get
the court to rule the outcome is unreasonable.
i should make both arguments.
1) the outcome is unreasonable, because the statue provides for minimal discretion.
2) the outcome is incorrect, because the statute provides for minimal discretion.
i
guess the point is that the statute provides for minimal discretion,
and she misinterpreted the evidence, producing a result that is both
incorrect and unreasonable.
yeah.
ok.
i think i've got that clear in my head, now.
Tuesday, November 7, 2017
this day was less productive than i wanted, but i feel like i'll be awake for a while still.
i did see one place. it was a basement, not an apartment. i need an apartment. i left some messages. i have some showings tomorrow.
i'm hoping to serve on thursday, if i can get the documents in line.
i have 30 business days to serve from the 27th, but i need to get it done with enough time to get the stay to the sheriff.
jagmeet singh must cut his beard.
i did see one place. it was a basement, not an apartment. i need an apartment. i left some messages. i have some showings tomorrow.
i'm hoping to serve on thursday, if i can get the documents in line.
i have 30 business days to serve from the 27th, but i need to get it done with enough time to get the stay to the sheriff.
jagmeet singh must cut his beard.
i abuse the language like everybody else, but virtually every job in
this economy is neither a job, nor is it work. it is a slave relation
that prevents an individual from carrying out meaningful labour,
or doing meaningful work. for, every moment that is spent doing forced
labour is a moment that is lost in free labour.
and, what drives all of this slavery is the market, under the tyranny of the necessity of rent.
in a capitalist economy, nobody chooses to work to pay rent. rather, we are enslaved to produce a surplus value for the rentier class. we are all prostitutes, so why punish prostitutes? and, that endemic slavery - which most of us don't even acknowledge - prevents us from working on meaningful projects like science, literature and art.
the market allows the ownership class to discard labour it does not feel is valuable. this surplus labour is then left to starve. this is the category i exist within, largely by choice. because i want to spend my time on meaningful work, not on the forced labour that defines our economy.
but, in enlightened societies, the state steps in to stop nature from running it's course.
we need more subsidized housing. that's where i should be. that's what i need. that's what i want.
jagmeet singh must cut his beard.
and, what drives all of this slavery is the market, under the tyranny of the necessity of rent.
in a capitalist economy, nobody chooses to work to pay rent. rather, we are enslaved to produce a surplus value for the rentier class. we are all prostitutes, so why punish prostitutes? and, that endemic slavery - which most of us don't even acknowledge - prevents us from working on meaningful projects like science, literature and art.
the market allows the ownership class to discard labour it does not feel is valuable. this surplus labour is then left to starve. this is the category i exist within, largely by choice. because i want to spend my time on meaningful work, not on the forced labour that defines our economy.
but, in enlightened societies, the state steps in to stop nature from running it's course.
we need more subsidized housing. that's where i should be. that's what i need. that's what i want.
jagmeet singh must cut his beard.
it wouldn't make any sense for me to go out in a murder-suicide until
i'm done my discography - and, even then, i've still got a lot of
writing to do.
see, this is the point you're missing: my rejection of capitalism is not a reflection of my disinterest in meaningful work, but of the wasteful non-work that it forces almost everybody to engage in. capitalism is not work. capitalism is pointless labour, in the absence of meaningful work.
and, i have no interest in family or status; if i had a family (and i did...), i'd reject it (and i did...).
might i kill you all in the end? well, there's some logic in it. but, it's going to be a long time before this presents itself to me as a serious option.
right now, i need to find some place to exist to finish my discography in. i thought it was here. it should have been. but, i can't control who buys the building.
i'm not done here, yet, either. i'm making a good faith effort to find something. but, i'll probably be in this building for another five or six months, at least.
jagmeet singh must cut his beard.
see, this is the point you're missing: my rejection of capitalism is not a reflection of my disinterest in meaningful work, but of the wasteful non-work that it forces almost everybody to engage in. capitalism is not work. capitalism is pointless labour, in the absence of meaningful work.
and, i have no interest in family or status; if i had a family (and i did...), i'd reject it (and i did...).
might i kill you all in the end? well, there's some logic in it. but, it's going to be a long time before this presents itself to me as a serious option.
right now, i need to find some place to exist to finish my discography in. i thought it was here. it should have been. but, i can't control who buys the building.
i'm not done here, yet, either. i'm making a good faith effort to find something. but, i'll probably be in this building for another five or six months, at least.
jagmeet singh must cut his beard.
Monday, November 6, 2017
i may have to make some fancy arguments. and, if this goes on long enough, i may end up writing some case law.
i acknowledge that it would initially seem like the proper standard for review is reasonableness and there should be deference to the body. but, the ruling was incorrect! so, i need a way to get them to rule on the right question.
if an explicit clause written in the legislature is enough to allow for deference, you'd think an explicit clause would likewise be enough to remove it. and, 83(3) is a hard stop.
i need to go back to the fact that the adjudicator didn't mention the documents. she didn't dismiss the evidence. she just ignored it. and, you ought not to do that.
so, how can the court rule in favour of deference when the legislation is written to all but abolish discretion, and the adjudicator clearly applied too much of it, to the point of explicitly excluding imperative evidence? this would be an obvious case for a correctness review, by order of the legislature.
the problem is that i don't have the right case law, and i consequently might not get a good reaction at a lower court. this happens sometimes - a hole in the law exists, and the lower courts can't plug it without the proper ruling coming down from up top. so, the lower courts just keep putting down dumb rulings.
i get the idea behind deference. but, this is exactly the situation where they need to use correctness.
i think i'm getting some sleep.
jagmeet singh must cut his beard.
i acknowledge that it would initially seem like the proper standard for review is reasonableness and there should be deference to the body. but, the ruling was incorrect! so, i need a way to get them to rule on the right question.
if an explicit clause written in the legislature is enough to allow for deference, you'd think an explicit clause would likewise be enough to remove it. and, 83(3) is a hard stop.
i need to go back to the fact that the adjudicator didn't mention the documents. she didn't dismiss the evidence. she just ignored it. and, you ought not to do that.
so, how can the court rule in favour of deference when the legislation is written to all but abolish discretion, and the adjudicator clearly applied too much of it, to the point of explicitly excluding imperative evidence? this would be an obvious case for a correctness review, by order of the legislature.
the problem is that i don't have the right case law, and i consequently might not get a good reaction at a lower court. this happens sometimes - a hole in the law exists, and the lower courts can't plug it without the proper ruling coming down from up top. so, the lower courts just keep putting down dumb rulings.
i get the idea behind deference. but, this is exactly the situation where they need to use correctness.
i think i'm getting some sleep.
jagmeet singh must cut his beard.
so...
i did study the difference between reasonableness and correctness; i did study dunsmuir. this isn't greek. although, having studied mathematics deeply and having dabbled in philosophy....i'm not terrible with greek.
i get the broad idea of what i need to do.
as i've stated repeatedly, i think the ruling was incorrect: that i provided plenty of evidence of the action being retaliatory, that i explicitly mentioned it more than once, including at the end, and that the adjudicator had minimal discretion in ruling under 83(3). she just wasn't paying attention; she'd already made up her mind. and, she done fucked right up, she did, yup. this argument is clear enough in my mind.
Further, subsection 83(3) provides for mandatory relief from eviction in certain situations. If the Board finds that any of clauses (a) to (e) of subsection 83(3) applies, the Board must not grant the application to evict.
what's daunting is the formalities, the pomp, the procedure. because there isn't an instruction manual - or at least i haven't found it yet. and, what i'm going to do wrong here is screw up a technicality...
i was actually glad to see that the precedent is dunsmiur. something familiar. an anchor. 'cause i remember that shit...
jagmeet singh must cut his beard.
i did study the difference between reasonableness and correctness; i did study dunsmuir. this isn't greek. although, having studied mathematics deeply and having dabbled in philosophy....i'm not terrible with greek.
i get the broad idea of what i need to do.
as i've stated repeatedly, i think the ruling was incorrect: that i provided plenty of evidence of the action being retaliatory, that i explicitly mentioned it more than once, including at the end, and that the adjudicator had minimal discretion in ruling under 83(3). she just wasn't paying attention; she'd already made up her mind. and, she done fucked right up, she did, yup. this argument is clear enough in my mind.
Further, subsection 83(3) provides for mandatory relief from eviction in certain situations. If the Board finds that any of clauses (a) to (e) of subsection 83(3) applies, the Board must not grant the application to evict.
what's daunting is the formalities, the pomp, the procedure. because there isn't an instruction manual - or at least i haven't found it yet. and, what i'm going to do wrong here is screw up a technicality...
i was actually glad to see that the precedent is dunsmiur. something familiar. an anchor. 'cause i remember that shit...
jagmeet singh must cut his beard.
it's really the old problem with property, isn't it?
i maintain that the ruling was incorrect relative to the law - that the law recognizes this kind of inequity, and has clauses designed to prevent it. but, if the adjudicator is a bitch, then the adjudicator is a bitch. i'm actually confident i'll eventually win this thing, via enough appeals - but i really hope i'm gone by then.
but, whatever argument you want to make in terms of the value of property (which i'm likely to tear apart...), you're always left with the reality that property really is theft. and, there's not any rational way to deny this: my apartment is quite literally being stolen from me.
the correct answer is to abolish property. and, while the canadian system of property is more feudal and tory than it is anarchist or mutualist, it kind of comes around to the right answer. or, at least it should. at least, it's written to.
again: that's why this woman isn't a judge - she really didn't have the wisdom to balance this well. i quite literally have nowhere to go. she's quite literally tossing me on the street. and, i consequently have no choice but to drag this out.
i maintain that the ruling was incorrect relative to the law - that the law recognizes this kind of inequity, and has clauses designed to prevent it. but, if the adjudicator is a bitch, then the adjudicator is a bitch. i'm actually confident i'll eventually win this thing, via enough appeals - but i really hope i'm gone by then.
but, whatever argument you want to make in terms of the value of property (which i'm likely to tear apart...), you're always left with the reality that property really is theft. and, there's not any rational way to deny this: my apartment is quite literally being stolen from me.
the correct answer is to abolish property. and, while the canadian system of property is more feudal and tory than it is anarchist or mutualist, it kind of comes around to the right answer. or, at least it should. at least, it's written to.
again: that's why this woman isn't a judge - she really didn't have the wisdom to balance this well. i quite literally have nowhere to go. she's quite literally tossing me on the street. and, i consequently have no choice but to drag this out.
i guess i had to catch up on some sleep.
then i had to do some grocery shopping, this morning. i shipped 48, 56. six orders left.
i got something to eat this afternoon, and it's been a little slow getting to the next point.
i'm caught up in the listings. there are actually a few more interesting things, but i couldn't get through to anybody. there's some long shot viewings tonight.
but i'm going to have to spent the rest of the night preparing documents, because i intend to serve tomorrow.
then i had to do some grocery shopping, this morning. i shipped 48, 56. six orders left.
i got something to eat this afternoon, and it's been a little slow getting to the next point.
i'm caught up in the listings. there are actually a few more interesting things, but i couldn't get through to anybody. there's some long shot viewings tonight.
but i'm going to have to spent the rest of the night preparing documents, because i intend to serve tomorrow.
Sunday, November 5, 2017
there was a big issue in canada a while back around
usage-based-billing, and the activist response was generally to push
back against it by throwing around horror stories about paying for heavy
data use.
but, i never really cared about what happens to these heavy users, because i'm not one.
if i'm paying $25 for 200 gb, that means i'm paying $0.13/gigabyte - and that if they charged me by usage, my bills would be less than $5/month. the cost per gigabyte would have to increase by over 1000% to get to the price i'm currently paying.
so, my self-interest was always in usage-based billing. and, i'd love to see somebody defy the court and offer that option.
but, i never really cared about what happens to these heavy users, because i'm not one.
if i'm paying $25 for 200 gb, that means i'm paying $0.13/gigabyte - and that if they charged me by usage, my bills would be less than $5/month. the cost per gigabyte would have to increase by over 1000% to get to the price i'm currently paying.
so, my self-interest was always in usage-based billing. and, i'd love to see somebody defy the court and offer that option.
free wifi. how appealing is this, really?
in absolute terms: not at all. i'd far rather have my own internet connection, and i'd far rather it be wired. but, there's some other factors to consider.
my current plan is no longer being offered. it's a 6/2 plan with 200 gb in downloads during peak periods, unlimited downloads after 2:00 am and unlimited uploads altogether. frankly, at $24.95/month, i'm overpaying for usage - because my total monthly usage is closer to 20 gb (and sometimes to 10 gb). october was 9.82. september was 11.09.
because i don't watch porn, i don't need more than 30 gb in usage. an ideal plan would be 50, but that's a big buffer - it's twice what i need. and, i've never been upset about the 6/2. if somebody were to offer me a quarter of the usage for a quarter of the price, i'd take it.
the entry plan for teksavvy in my region is currently 15 mbps, at $35/month + hst. i would just consider a forced upgrade to be a cash grab; i don't want it. but, it means that the value of the free wifi is not $28/month, but $40/month.
what that means is that a $625 apartment is really more like a $585 apartment, if it's offering wifi for free - and that a $750 apartment is more like a $710 one.
of course, i'll need to ask some questions. i wouldn't notice any difference in going from 6 mbps down to 4 mbps down, but i might notice a difference in going from 2 mbps up to 1 mbps up. and, anything slower than that isn't really useable. but, i'd rather get a 4 mbps connection for free than pay for a 15 mbps connection.
it's something else to think about.
i have some showings tomorrow night, and some more on wednesday. some things came up this morning, but i slept all day after an all nighter in detroit. i'll need to make those calls in the morning.
for the rest of the night, i'm going to try to get some work done.
in absolute terms: not at all. i'd far rather have my own internet connection, and i'd far rather it be wired. but, there's some other factors to consider.
my current plan is no longer being offered. it's a 6/2 plan with 200 gb in downloads during peak periods, unlimited downloads after 2:00 am and unlimited uploads altogether. frankly, at $24.95/month, i'm overpaying for usage - because my total monthly usage is closer to 20 gb (and sometimes to 10 gb). october was 9.82. september was 11.09.
because i don't watch porn, i don't need more than 30 gb in usage. an ideal plan would be 50, but that's a big buffer - it's twice what i need. and, i've never been upset about the 6/2. if somebody were to offer me a quarter of the usage for a quarter of the price, i'd take it.
the entry plan for teksavvy in my region is currently 15 mbps, at $35/month + hst. i would just consider a forced upgrade to be a cash grab; i don't want it. but, it means that the value of the free wifi is not $28/month, but $40/month.
what that means is that a $625 apartment is really more like a $585 apartment, if it's offering wifi for free - and that a $750 apartment is more like a $710 one.
of course, i'll need to ask some questions. i wouldn't notice any difference in going from 6 mbps down to 4 mbps down, but i might notice a difference in going from 2 mbps up to 1 mbps up. and, anything slower than that isn't really useable. but, i'd rather get a 4 mbps connection for free than pay for a 15 mbps connection.
it's something else to think about.
i have some showings tomorrow night, and some more on wednesday. some things came up this morning, but i slept all day after an all nighter in detroit. i'll need to make those calls in the morning.
for the rest of the night, i'm going to try to get some work done.
Friday, November 3, 2017
and, inri058 is done, too, but it's been created with a unique problem - there's now four full records worth of material attached to it. it's five hours. how's that for crazy, right?
i wasn't expecting bandcamp to even let me do this, but i'm going to be offering it in two and four disc options. the four disc option will be $28 - it's four ep singles. the two disc option would be a double hybrid double ep single and run for $20. the difference would be that the four disc option would give you everything on cd, whereas the two disc option would give you half on cd and the other half as a download only. i have other double hybrid ep singles attached to symphonies 1 & 2 as precedent.
i'm aware that this is nuts. but, i had download only tracks to start with - it was two full discs, plus 35 extra minutes of download only. i've extended the ambient mix and added an ry30 mix, which is another ten minutes. but, it's then an aesthetic problem to have that much as a pure download. one track on each side, and you can let it slide. 45 minutes over three tracks, and there's already a third disc.
then, i'm stuck with a three piece record again, and i don't like these.
it was easy to fill up another disc: 50 minutes of 2002 mixes (these are worthwhile, in truth), 25 more for the 2009 youtube mix (which i felt was overlooked to begin with) and nineteen more for a final drone mix. that;s four discs, full: 77, 75, 75, 79. it's just under five hours...
the way this will work is that the 2xcd version will be the version that's been up since late 2014, plus added downloads between the tracks.
it will make more sense when i show you.
i wasn't expecting bandcamp to even let me do this, but i'm going to be offering it in two and four disc options. the four disc option will be $28 - it's four ep singles. the two disc option would be a double hybrid double ep single and run for $20. the difference would be that the four disc option would give you everything on cd, whereas the two disc option would give you half on cd and the other half as a download only. i have other double hybrid ep singles attached to symphonies 1 & 2 as precedent.
i'm aware that this is nuts. but, i had download only tracks to start with - it was two full discs, plus 35 extra minutes of download only. i've extended the ambient mix and added an ry30 mix, which is another ten minutes. but, it's then an aesthetic problem to have that much as a pure download. one track on each side, and you can let it slide. 45 minutes over three tracks, and there's already a third disc.
then, i'm stuck with a three piece record again, and i don't like these.
it was easy to fill up another disc: 50 minutes of 2002 mixes (these are worthwhile, in truth), 25 more for the 2009 youtube mix (which i felt was overlooked to begin with) and nineteen more for a final drone mix. that;s four discs, full: 77, 75, 75, 79. it's just under five hours...
the way this will work is that the 2xcd version will be the version that's been up since late 2014, plus added downloads between the tracks.
it will make more sense when i show you.
this is
the sum total of the completed rabit is wolf studio experiments, which
wound through a number of paths on their way to the project's eventual
collapse. while there would be further acoustic demos recorded with
sean, i ultimately decided to abandon their folky underpinnings and
finish all further tracks as electronic, instrumental recordings. a tour
ep of the final recordings exists as inri059.
the recording was initially sequenced as a demo in mid may, 2002 but i foolishly deleted the files (i was running low on hard drive space) only to find out that the burn was corrupt and that the result was skipping. i did eventually recompile an ep of material, but it was in a different order and made no attempt to mix the tracks together. in reconstructing the demo, i've decided to recreate the original sequencing. the only difference between this collection and the initial collection is that the last track now includes sean's vocals, whereas it was initially an (eventually rendered incomplete) instrumental recording.
i need to be clear that the decision in sequencing the material this way is unilateral on my behalf. during this period, sean had made it clear that he was not satisfied with the more experimental and electronic tendencies underlying some of the tracks; specifically, he wasn't happy with the first or last tracks on this disc, as he felt they did not represent his vision for the project. on the other hand, i was less interested in purely acoustic music and more interested in electronic music. i was envisioning the project as having a split personality between an acoustic live presentation and an electronic studio presentation. sean argued this would be disorienting; it's less that i disagreed with him and more that i thought that was a good idea. this divergence in vision is one of the factors leading to the project's dissolution.
while i feel this recording stands up on it's own, i've also taken the time over the second half of 2014 to reclaim some of the tracks as my own instrumental works. only tracks two and four exist uniquely as rabit is wolf collaborations; the other four tracks have been resequenced as completed instrumentals in my main recording sequence. please open the track pages for more information.
written and recorded in late 2001 and early 2002. initially sequenced in may, 2002. released in slightly different forms from 2002-2014. resequenced to mimic the original sequencing on november 8, 2014. except to sequence the record, these files have not been altered since 2002. disc finalized as lp013 on nov 3, 2017. as always, please use headphones.
this release also includes a printable jewel case insert and will also eventually include a comprehensive package of journal entries from all phases of production (2002, 2014, 2017).
the recording was initially sequenced as a demo in mid may, 2002 but i foolishly deleted the files (i was running low on hard drive space) only to find out that the burn was corrupt and that the result was skipping. i did eventually recompile an ep of material, but it was in a different order and made no attempt to mix the tracks together. in reconstructing the demo, i've decided to recreate the original sequencing. the only difference between this collection and the initial collection is that the last track now includes sean's vocals, whereas it was initially an (eventually rendered incomplete) instrumental recording.
i need to be clear that the decision in sequencing the material this way is unilateral on my behalf. during this period, sean had made it clear that he was not satisfied with the more experimental and electronic tendencies underlying some of the tracks; specifically, he wasn't happy with the first or last tracks on this disc, as he felt they did not represent his vision for the project. on the other hand, i was less interested in purely acoustic music and more interested in electronic music. i was envisioning the project as having a split personality between an acoustic live presentation and an electronic studio presentation. sean argued this would be disorienting; it's less that i disagreed with him and more that i thought that was a good idea. this divergence in vision is one of the factors leading to the project's dissolution.
while i feel this recording stands up on it's own, i've also taken the time over the second half of 2014 to reclaim some of the tracks as my own instrumental works. only tracks two and four exist uniquely as rabit is wolf collaborations; the other four tracks have been resequenced as completed instrumentals in my main recording sequence. please open the track pages for more information.
written and recorded in late 2001 and early 2002. initially sequenced in may, 2002. released in slightly different forms from 2002-2014. resequenced to mimic the original sequencing on november 8, 2014. except to sequence the record, these files have not been altered since 2002. disc finalized as lp013 on nov 3, 2017. as always, please use headphones.
this release also includes a printable jewel case insert and will also eventually include a comprehensive package of journal entries from all phases of production (2002, 2014, 2017).
credits
released June 20, 2002
j - guitars (electric, acoustic, classical), effects, bass, synthesizers, digital piano, electric air reed organ, flute, drum programming, drum manipulations, vocal manipulations, loops, sequencing, sampling, digital wave editing, production, cover art.
sean - vocals, lyrics, harmonica (1), ring modulator (6).
greg - drum performance sample source (5,6)
jon - guitar performance (2)
j - guitars (electric, acoustic, classical), effects, bass, synthesizers, digital piano, electric air reed organ, flute, drum programming, drum manipulations, vocal manipulations, loops, sequencing, sampling, digital wave editing, production, cover art.
sean - vocals, lyrics, harmonica (1), ring modulator (6).
greg - drum performance sample source (5,6)
jon - guitar performance (2)
Thursday, November 2, 2017
republishing inri056
time &
psi were partially a rejection of the folk idea in favour of glossy,
somewhat experimental pop. i realized that it was reasonable to move in a
more commercial direction, but folk wasn't something i understood well,
so it was a weird direction for me to be moving in. experimental or
psychedelic pop, on the other hand, was something i had a solid grasp
on...
time had been initially recorded in the fall and was remixed in late february to integrate a drum part. no original files exist. psi was recorded quickly in early march.
the track, as it existed in rabit, was a conscious pop compromise. i had ideas that weren't explored to keep it poppy and that have been expanded upon in the remixes.
the time machine is added here as a bonus track. it's based on an earlier classical guitar composition that was always meant to be reinterpreted as an idm tune and finally was in early 2014. the thematic overlap makes it relevant, but there is otherwise no connection between the two songs.
i started working on what would become my seventh symphony very shortly after the material on this ep was completed, and it really represents the point where i lost interest in rabit as a concept, under pressure to continue moving in a direction i didn't have any interest in. there are folk and psych versions of the track; sean never caught on to the psych version, and i never had my heart in the folk version. there were final folk demos recorded as late as the fall, but the disconnect was not solvable. the vocal version of the seventh symphony is in some way a corollary of but is ultimately too separate from these files to include here. psi & time, together, consequently comprise what is the fourth and final ("psychedelic pop") phase of rabit is wolf.
written in late 2001 and early 2002 and recorded in early 2002 and late 2014. the final mix was finished on nov 18, 2014. the uncorrupted mix was created on nov 18, 2014 and then cut up into the unstuck mix, but not added to the release until nov 2, 2017. the lorentz factor mix and the separated from mix were rendered on nov 2, 2017. disc finalized on nov 2, 2017. as always, please use headphones.
the 2014 instrumental version appears on my sixth record:
jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/jjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj-2
the 2002 vocal mix appears on the rabit is wolf demo:
jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/rabit-is-wolf
this release also includes a printable jewel case insert and will also eventually include a comprehensive package of journal entries from all phases of production (2002, 2014, 2017).
time had been initially recorded in the fall and was remixed in late february to integrate a drum part. no original files exist. psi was recorded quickly in early march.
the track, as it existed in rabit, was a conscious pop compromise. i had ideas that weren't explored to keep it poppy and that have been expanded upon in the remixes.
the time machine is added here as a bonus track. it's based on an earlier classical guitar composition that was always meant to be reinterpreted as an idm tune and finally was in early 2014. the thematic overlap makes it relevant, but there is otherwise no connection between the two songs.
i started working on what would become my seventh symphony very shortly after the material on this ep was completed, and it really represents the point where i lost interest in rabit as a concept, under pressure to continue moving in a direction i didn't have any interest in. there are folk and psych versions of the track; sean never caught on to the psych version, and i never had my heart in the folk version. there were final folk demos recorded as late as the fall, but the disconnect was not solvable. the vocal version of the seventh symphony is in some way a corollary of but is ultimately too separate from these files to include here. psi & time, together, consequently comprise what is the fourth and final ("psychedelic pop") phase of rabit is wolf.
written in late 2001 and early 2002 and recorded in early 2002 and late 2014. the final mix was finished on nov 18, 2014. the uncorrupted mix was created on nov 18, 2014 and then cut up into the unstuck mix, but not added to the release until nov 2, 2017. the lorentz factor mix and the separated from mix were rendered on nov 2, 2017. disc finalized on nov 2, 2017. as always, please use headphones.
the 2014 instrumental version appears on my sixth record:
jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/jjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj-2
the 2002 vocal mix appears on the rabit is wolf demo:
jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/rabit-is-wolf
this release also includes a printable jewel case insert and will also eventually include a comprehensive package of journal entries from all phases of production (2002, 2014, 2017).
credits
released March 10, 2002
j - electric & acoustic guitars, bass, synthesizers, digital effects & processing, drum manipulations, orchestral & other sequencing, drum notation sequencing, digital wave editing, loops, sound design, production, composition.
sean - vocals, lyrics (3,7)
greg - drum performance sample source (1-3, 5-6)
the rendered electronic orchestra on track 5 includes acoustic bass, synth bass, electric bass, brass, orchestra hit, drum machine, electronic drum kit, nylon guitar, electric guitar, synthesizer effects, music box, piano, bells and mellotron.
j - electric & acoustic guitars, bass, synthesizers, digital effects & processing, drum manipulations, orchestral & other sequencing, drum notation sequencing, digital wave editing, loops, sound design, production, composition.
sean - vocals, lyrics (3,7)
greg - drum performance sample source (1-3, 5-6)
the rendered electronic orchestra on track 5 includes acoustic bass, synth bass, electric bass, brass, orchestra hit, drum machine, electronic drum kit, nylon guitar, electric guitar, synthesizer effects, music box, piano, bells and mellotron.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)