Being a guitar player, nothing beats the real thing. However, at least he's playing and doing it pretty well. I was expecting the continued injustice of stealing and looping parts of songs from real musicians.

I suspect we're going to see a lot more sample controllers evolving. Roger Linn has a new one out too. Its pretty cool but again, the best reason about Rock and Roll was the guys playing their instruments and singing live.

To date, there has never been a better replacement for real musicians playing rhythm guitars.

I know, that controler seems pretty nice.. I've seen it used for oriental music with 1/4 tone scales.. it was nice.
But electric guitar on a keyboard is kind of ... unatural to me ;)

So many bands have been replaced with cheap karaoke dude around town.. I just miss the real thing..

pcrecord, post: 441676, member: 46460 wrote: So many bands have been replaced with cheap karaoke dude around town.. I just miss the real thing..

Same here.
I toured 18 years. I lived out of a suitcases the entire time traveling around North America, guitar in hand. :love:.
When the DJ thing started dominating clubs, I packed my performing years in, started RO and a recording studio.
ITB is killing us. Damned if we do, damned if we don't. And so I continue... trying to keep up with all this virtual integration and the dream that I will someday hear a pop song that actually inspires me enough to want to start jamming again lol.

We watch these sampler demonstration all the time, yet, where are these people who buy these gizmo's actually playing?
I don't know about the rest of the world but I've never seen one band making a living with one of these around here to date.
And all the pop music I hear on the radio has zero soloing.

I love the Blues most today. Real players that are removed from all of this. (Aside from my real job today, because I cannot earn a living as a musician anymore )I work and continue in the virtual music world by day, but live the Blues in my personal life.

We could start a new forum, or include this in our forum description.
"Lean how to BS your way through this business, lol" (y)

I've been able to do this since I bought Pro Tools in 1998. I tried to tell the old school guys back then that Pro Tools was going to take over this industry and you better prepare for it. Shit, I was into Techno from 1979 on. Saw it all going down and refused to become dated and broke. So I started RO and tried to share it all with the world.

Kurt Foster and I had quite a time with that one. Old school meets new generation and all in between.

I saw electronic drums on a few gigs. It's a specially good choice in restaurants where you don't want to blast any sadistic aunt ! ;)

Radio pop songs got to the pace of the youngsters who need continuous stimulation 24/7..
Did you ever turned to a child TV show recently? One new toon show started to air not long ago.. It's made by humorists I used to listen on the radio so I gave it a try.. MAN I almost burned in flame. No storyline just short spots, running around without any presentations. Every 20 seconds you get a new decor and characters who blast away some information before it changes to the next one..
At least we had some story when Goldorack and Captain harlock were on !

This guy looks like he sells fake Rolex's on street corners then whispers "You want girls?"under his breath. What I wanted was Jimi. I only say this to acknowledge how huckstery all product demos like this look like and feel. As a controller all the touch bending was pretty sweet but I would have liked to see or hear him cut loose on Chameleon with this - something really genre specific. Let us guitar players have out thing -- particularly our Jimi - he's ours. Not since the advent of the Keytar has there been such a sustained assault on the territory of cool once reserved for guitar players. If your keyboard can be rolled up and used as a yoga mat we got a problem.

Pretty sweet though -- but I'm off sugar.

The Seaboard RISE featured in a thread I posted on polychromatic music a little while ago.

http://recording.org/threads/polychromatic-music-modern-microtonal-instruments.59589/

I'm not sure about emulating Hendrix with one...but I think it may be a glimpse of things to come.

I like the way you can simply slide across from one key to the next...as well as bending the note by sliding up and down the key and the vibrato effect you can achieve...makes it a little unique in that sense.

I have no doubt that the controler has great feature and quality. I just prefer hearing and seeing the real thing.
Could you imagine Angus Young with one of those things on stage ?? ;)

It might be an awesome controller... personally though, can't stand the feel. And, if I want guitar, I'll grab a guitar!!!!.

pcrecord, post: 441815, member: 46460 wrote: I have no doubt that the controler has great feature and quality. I just prefer hearing and seeing the real thing.
Could you imagine Angus Young with one of those things on stage ??

I think this guy in the video was setting himself up for a lot of criticism from the moment he decided to use a Hendrix song.
It's not really any different than someone choosing a Yo-Yo Ma piece to demonstrate a cello sample.
The purists among us, those who respect those musicians for their talent, skill and sound, will never really be happy listening to something like this.

But, while you may not like the sound of the sample(s) he is using, at least he can play.

It's not like he's one of those "musicians", who'll buy a new synth with loops and chords and "songs" built-in, and then simply hit and hold down one or two keys, and then call it an "original composition".
Most of those people aren't even able to identify Middle C, let alone actually create something of their own from scratch.

I had a client once, who "wrote" an entire album's worth of "songs" - that were nothing more than preset, pre-programmed parts that came stock as part of the synth's sound /patch library.
The guy was tone deaf, actually, and had no idea of how to play... even a simple G Maj triad was beyond his scope.
He'd merely hit certain notes/keys - always single notes - that would play loops and pre-programmed ensemble performances.

And, full disclosure... yeah, I recorded him, I took his money...after all, I was running a business, and had bills to pay.
But there was zero creative input from me ( and none from him, either, for that matter ... as he was incapable of providing any). I was merely a button-pushing, knob-twisting, mix-monkey on that particular "project".

None of this is the fault of the technology though. Technology is there for us to use - or not use - as we see fit. What we do with it is entirely up to us. ;)

IMHO of course,
-d.

i say anyone who plays keys, who plays anything other than a hammond (or pseudo clones) or piano should get their fingers crushed. i mean it. i hate this sh*t. it's not Rock & Roll.

Kurt Foster, post: 441822, member: 7836 wrote: i say anyone who plays keys, who plays anything other than a hammond (or pseudo clones) or piano should get their fingers crushed. i mean it. i hate this sh*t. it's not Rock & Roll.

Wow... That's pretty harsh, Kurt.
Why just piano and B3? Does that punishment also apply to guys/girls who play Rhodes, or Wurli's, or Clavs? How about Pipe Organs? Or Harpsichords?

Following your train of thought, you feel as though all keyboard instruments other than Pianos and B3's are "invalid" as instruments?
And that cats like like Keith Emerson, Tony Banks or Stevie Wonder, should have their "fingers crushed" because of their choices to perhaps play a Moog or Mellotron, an Oberheim or Prophet, or a Synclavier ? ...

Just curious, seeking a little "clarification" ...

ok i was over the top a bit. lol .... but the sentiment remains. i just hate all this virtual sh*t. i think it's ruining music. you're correct moogs are cool but i remain anti synth in essence. anything that's an emulation sucks imo. just an opinion, not a fact. so everyone can chill. i'm not trying to start a flame war here. :ROFLMAO:

Kurt Foster, post: 441824, member: 7836 wrote: ok i was over the top a bit. lol .... but the sentiment remains. i just hate all this virtual sh*t. i think it's ruining music. you're correct moogs are cool but i remain anti synth in essence. anything that's an emulation sucks imo. just an opinion, not a fact. so everyone can chill. i'm not trying to start a flame war here. :ROFLMAO:

I didn't think you were trying to start a flame war ... it's all good...we're just talking. :)

I can appreciate the love of the real thing.
I guess my thought is that there are many synth sounds that aren't meant to "emulate" anything in particular, and that are of their own sound and origin.

IMHO of course. ;)

DonnyThompson, post: 441827, member: 46114 wrote: I guess my thought is that there are many synth sounds that aren't meant to "emulate" anything in particular, and that are of their own sound and origin.

and that's why i said "emulate" ..... and it's not like i am guilt free myself.

i've used drum machines when i had to and i had a Kurzweil and a Proteus i used for bells and strings, stuff that was on 60's records. the goal was to be able to make records like Phil ..... those kinds of sounds but, if i had the opportunity to hire a real player to play a real instrument i would opt for that. i don't think any of it really sounds real. it's like a gmo tomato or a "chicken" nugget .... close but no cigar.

I guess doing it alone in the studio with very good samples (if convincing) doesn't disturb me much..
But LIVE ??

I find I favor music made with things that get their sound from actual physical oscillation. There's natural variation that something with only 128 different possible sounds per note, only a small range of which is likely to be used in a song, can never reproduce. Secondly, the acoustic interaction between a guitar and an amp in a room adds another level of complexity that digitally synthesized and sampled audio sources can't emulate, at least for now. Analog synths get a pass because they have that inherent unpredictability. You can never get the exact sound twice.

And of course the average modern listener on earbuds can hear the difference live or otherwise.. :sneaky:

Makzimia, post: 441832, member: 48344 wrote: And of course the average modern listener on earbuds can hear the difference live or otherwise.. :sneaky:

and so? ..... it matters not to me what the "average listener" can hear or wants. imo the average listener is a thing of the past. no ones getting rich or even making a decent living at this any more for the most part, so what's the point? it's only art now so why not please ourselves and say " screw the average listener"?

Kurt Foster, post: 441834, member: 7836 wrote: and so? ..... it matters not to me what the "average listener" can hear or wants. imo the average listener is a thing of the past. no ones getting rich or even making a decent living at this any more for the most part, so what's the point? it's only art now so why not please ourselves and say " screw the average listener"?

Uh huh :)

DonnyThompson, post: 441819, member: 46114 wrote:
But, while you may not like the sound of the sample(s) he is using, at least he can play.

I think that's why I feel so dirty and uncomfortable... The controller is incredible in terms of what it allows you to do -- I'm just not sure sure I want him to be allowed to do it. I was serious when I said I half expected him to say "You want girls?" under his breath because I'm sure the stable of beauties he has working for him could take me round the world so to speak -- but I'd feel really dirty after that too. But Yup I agree that dude can play and the product does some amazing stuff. - though I don't see it standing up very well to wear.

I can remember the first time I saw a guy really rocking out on a keytar -- with the pitch bend strip doing whammy style dive bombs --- it was cool --- then suddenly and obviously it wasn't. That might have had something to do with how white he was and the knee high white Adidas tube socks he was wearing, or the Tennis Player head band ---- actually now looking back I'm not so sure that it wasn't John Mcenroe in the first place - not sure what the hell he would have been doing playing a keytar with a bad cover band in the summer of '81 in Vancouver...

DogsoverLava, post: 441836, member: 48175 wrote: I can remember the first time I saw a guy really rocking out on a keytar -- with the pitch bend strip doing whammy style dive bombs --- it was cool --- then suddenly and obviously it wasn't. That might have had something to do with how white he was and the knee high white Adidas tube socks he was wearing, or the Tennis Player head band ---- actually now looking back I'm not so sure that it wasn't John Mcenroe in the first place - not sure what the hell he would have been doing playing a keytar with a bad cover band in the summer of '81 in Vancouver...

Dude probably failed his audition for Loverboy because he was too white. Canada, headband, it all fits.

Kurt Foster a ruff day have you ?

pcrecord, post: 441839, member: 46460 wrote: Kurt Foster a ruff day have you ?

not particularly. better than some, no worse than others ........

bouldersound, post: 441838, member: 38959 wrote: Dude probably failed his audition for Loverboy because he was too white. Canada, headband, it all fits.

Sometimes failing your lover boy audition is winning.... but landing the Trooper audition... Lordy!!!

Kurt Foster, post: 441822, member: 7836 wrote: i say anyone who plays keys, who plays anything other than a hammond (or pseudo clones) or piano should get their fingers crushed. i mean it. i hate this sh*t. it's not Rock & Roll.

Thats Gold Kurt...now excuse me while I throw my TV out of the window...;)

bouldersound, post: 441831, member: 38959 wrote: I find I favor music made with things that get their sound from actual physical oscillation. There's natural variation that something with only 128 different possible sounds per note, only a small range of which is likely to be used in a song, can never reproduce. Secondly, the acoustic interaction between a guitar and an amp in a room adds another level of complexity that digitally synthesized and sampled audio sources can't emulate, at least for now. Analog synths get a pass because they have that inherent unpredictability. You can never get the exact sound twice.

Kurt Foster, post: 441828, member: 7836 wrote: if i had the opportunity to hire a real player to play a real instrument i would opt for that.

For me, when it comes to real vs. emulation, it's less about the physics of sound that Boulder mentioned, and more about the human element involved, when you have real people playing real instruments.
( FWIW I do consider synthesizers to be valid instruments... anything that you have to actually play, that requires talent and skill , is "valid" to me.)

You'll find the "natural variation" you mentioned when using real musicians; those moments where mistakes turn out to be gold, and the variation of the human performance is part of what can make the sound so desirable...
So, like Kurt, I prefer to use real players playing real instruments whenever possible. But, there are times when it's not possible, and for those times, I'll use whatever is available to me.

I've never gotten to a point where I've said to myself, "I have this song I want to record, but I don't have "_____" available to me right now, so I think it's probably best that I just not record..."

While real instruments ( including analog gear such as drums, guitar amps, pre's, mics, etc.) have their own tone, their own natural variation, their own "sonic signature", the art doesn't lie in the instrument or in the electronics...
It's in the hands and soul of the person playing it. ;)

IMHO of course.
-d.

This I call the real thing :

DonnyThompson, post: 441855, member: 46114 wrote: FWIW I do consider synthesizers to be valid instruments... anything that you have to actually play, that requires talent and skill , is "valid" to me.

and that's fine with me. where i begin to object is when synths are employed to replace not just one element but a whole band and all the parts are played by one person. that is where i saw the music business slip into the dumper. midi and sequencing destroyed the music biz. not just studio biz but live playing too.

Musicianship goes a long way, but eventually I tire of the sound of samples and synthesizers regardless of the player. And it's not just the sound of real instruments that I prefer. They draw something out of musicians that I don't get from people playing synths and samplers.

i think music snapped to a grid is not musical. put a bunch of players in a room. somehow they can all lock in together. i don't know how but they do in spite of the fact that sound travels at roughly 340.29 m / s. try playing into a latency like that. you can't do it.

live players in a room locking in and grooving. it's magic that no computer can reproduce. just the quantizing of samples affects it imo. that's why analog is better. digital recording is like taking a mirror and breaking it into thousands of equal sized pieces (A/D) and the gluing it all back together again (D/A). something always gets lost and total randomness becomes a sameness.

bouldersound, post: 441862, member: 38959 wrote: Musicianship goes a long way, but eventually I tire of the sound of samples and synthesizers regardless of the player. And it's not just the sound of real instruments that I prefer. They draw something out of musicians that I don't get from people playing synths and samplers.

Kurt Foster, post: 441867, member: 7836 wrote: i think music snapped to a grid is not musical. put a bunch of players in a room. somehow they can all lock in together. i don't know how but they do in spite of the fact that sound travels at roughly 340.29 m / s. try playing into a latency like that. you can't do it.

live players in a room locking in and grooving. it's magic that no computer can reproduce. just the quantizing of samples affects it imo. that's why analog is better. digital recording is like taking a mirror and breaking it into thousands of equal sized pieces (A/D) and the gluing it all back together again (D/A). something always gets lost and total randomness becomes a sameness.

This is a very subjective opinion for both of you. I couldn't agree and disagree more. If I am playing with good musicians, why would I need to correct them.
If I am creating pop music, then it's part of the sound and workflow.
If you don't sound pop you shouldn't be pretending to play it. If you can't play with good musicians, you shouldn't be playing with then either.

Both Boulder and Kurt are performance based engineers? From what I've heard of your work (very good indeed), you don't sound pop. This isn't and insult or a compliment. Its simply why you think the way you do, correct?

There are no rules, and no one is right. Its simply part of a workflow. You guys obviously would not be pursuing a career in pop music, "today".

audiokid, post: 441868, member: 1 wrote: From what I've heard of your work, you don't sound pop

thanks for the compliment Chris. imo. what you call "Pop" is a passing genre'. The Beatles were cosidered pop. but they will live for ever. in 10 years no one will even remember "I feel Happy" or "All About The Bass". can anyone even tell me what was on the POP charts 3 years ago? i doubt it. that is the epitome of what i was mentioning earlier. music produced by one control freak / person who can't deal with other people, living in remote places where they can't get clients, on a keyboard / sequencer using GMO soylent green samples and sounds all snapped to a grid. emotionless and sterile. not my cuppa. but if you like it, more power to you. it takes all kinds.

Kurt Foster, post: 441869, member: 7836 wrote: thanks for the compliment Chris. imo. what you call "Pop" is a passing genre'. The Beatles were cosidered pop. but they will live for ever. in 10 years no one will even remember "I feel Happy" or "All About The Bass". can anyone even tell me what was on the POP charts 3 years ago? i doubt it. that is the epitome of what i was mentioning earlier. music produced by one control freak / person who can't deal with other people, living in remote places where they can't get clients, on a keyboard / sequencer using GMO soylent green samples and sounds all snapped to a grid. emotionless and sterile. not my cuppa. but if you like it, more power to you. it takes all kinds.

My comment was not to be an insult or compliment. It's an ibservation based on 4o years as a professional musician and engineer.
I work with all kinds of music and study how it's done. Pop music has changed a lot since the Beatles and so has the process to create it.
Not all pop music is electronics or acoustic but I hear a common sound in it all.
It sounds pop, modern, like today's crop.
It's a business with a particular sound which also uses electronics that are part of a DAW.
Some songs are more a product, some are less electronics and more performance. To my ears, you use the tools for the task.

audiokid, post: 441871, member: 1 wrote: Not all pop music is electronics or acoustic but I hear a common sound in it all.

thats the DAW thing. it makes everything sameo sameo.

audiokid, post: 441871, member: 1 wrote:

My comment was not to be an insult or compliment.

neither was mine. :love:

audiokid, post: 441871, member: 1 wrote: It sounds pop, modern, like today's crop

but most of it sounds like ass Chis. if your friend jumps off a bridge, you don't have to jump too. we are leaders, not followers. we should blaze new trails, go against the grain every chance we get. that's what Rock & Roll is all about.

Or go down with the ship either.
Big hug

audiokid, post: 441874, member: 1 wrote: Or go down with the ship either.
Big hug

Pop is a big category with a long history and constantly changing meaning. I have nothing against pop in the general sense. Heck, I just spent the last two nights mixing a pop song, but there's no click track, no grid, no pitch correction, no looped samples, nobody says "baby, baby", there's lots of guitar and it even has pedal steel. But it's pop as hell, in the sense of Beatles (early on), Kinks, Cheap Trick, Rembrandts. That is, it's power pop. Disco is pop. Andy Williams is pop. Benny Goodman is pop. Billy Joel is pop. Pop can be awesome.

It's the relentless untz-untz, the same drum pattern looped at a rigid tempo for the whole song, the lack of dynamics, the disposable lyrics, the near total lack of melody or even audible instruments other than drums and vocal that bores me and grates on my ear. It's not an absolute but I find the more of those traits a song has the less time I am willing to spend listening to it. Eight or sixteen measures in and I've pretty much heard the whole thing. I want to hear people playing together, not a producer's idea of perfection.

I'm not making a general statement about "good" music or "bad" music, I'm just recognizing my own biases. Lot's of people like that stuff, which is fine with me. I'm glad there's music out there that I don't like as it helps me appreciate the music I do like even more. The more Indigo Girls I hear the more I like X.

Believe it or not this is music : :ROFLMAO:

I like this better. Don't worry, it's an instrumental. Nothing offensive other than the unsettling title.