holy cow quantise kills

Discussion of music production, audio, equipment and any related topics, either with or without Ableton Live
raapie
Posts: 1029
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 8:13 am
Location: The Hague, Netherlands
Contact:

..

Post by raapie » Thu Oct 20, 2005 11:58 am

in my opinion a groove is when there's tension and release between the notes, not when everything is totally even.

in a groove the drummer might push the beat or pay behind the beat, laidback, but when the notes are straight on the beat, it's just a beat, but not a groove. imo. a groove should have tension in the timing. a push or a laidback feel. but at least a feel.
Marco Raaphorst

music, sound & story maker

https://melodiefabriek.com

Machinate
Posts: 11646
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 2:15 pm
Location: Denmark
Contact:

Re: ..

Post by Machinate » Thu Oct 20, 2005 12:03 pm

Chris J wrote:
Machinate wrote: Some of the funkiest music out there is straight.
Huh ? certainly not. You'll have to define funky first.
Maybe it's like RNB that used to mean rhythm & blues, and now means commercial, prefab crap.

So Funk that used to mean soulful & tight live bands, would now means 16th quantized computer generated beats.
Hold yer horses there, Chris. Did I say anything about the jb's, or photek or RNB? Did I critisize funk *at all*? Besides, if you acknowledge the subjective nature of "funk", then why on earth start out by saying "certainly not"?

To my ears, a lot of really funky stuff can be straight as hell. And super-swung tracks *can* sound sloppy and un-funky. And computer-generated? Well a lot of software can do a pretty cool shuffle nowadays, so to some extent that argument doesn't really hold true either, So the funk is found elsewhere, I think. Syncopation and repetition, if you ask me.
mbp 2.66, osx 10.6.8, 8GB ram.

Chris J
Posts: 1353
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 5:24 pm

Re: ..

Post by Chris J » Thu Oct 20, 2005 12:40 pm

Machinate wrote:
Chris J wrote:
Machinate wrote: Some of the funkiest music out there is straight.
Huh ? certainly not. You'll have to define funky first.
Maybe it's like RNB that used to mean rhythm & blues, and now means commercial, prefab crap.

So Funk that used to mean soulful & tight live bands, would now means 16th quantized computer generated beats.
Hold yer horses there, Chris. Did I say anything about the jb's, or photek or RNB? Did I critisize funk *at all*? Besides, if you acknowledge the subjective nature of "funk", then why on earth start out by saying "certainly not"?

To my ears, a lot of really funky stuff can be straight as hell. And super-swung tracks *can* sound sloppy and un-funky. And computer-generated? Well a lot of software can do a pretty cool shuffle nowadays, so to some extent that argument doesn't really hold true either, So the funk is found elsewhere, I think. Syncopation and repetition, if you ask me.
I said I read someone (not you) here saying Photek was funky. You said some of the funkiest track out there are straight. So I say: No.
Or by straight you mean no shuffle ? I thought you meant hard quantized.
And then I remembered someone here said the JB's were not tight, proof being their tracks were hard to warp.

Never heard a 16th or 32nd quantized track that sounded funky. You can dance to it if you're into that, but not funky.

So what's your definition of funky ?

a shuffle on a computer is no funk to me.
Quad 6600 Intel, AsusP5Q, 2Gb ram, XP sp3, Evolution MK361c & UC33e, Line6 UX8

montrealbreaks
Posts: 995
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2004 11:38 pm
Location: Montreal Canada

Re: ..

Post by montrealbreaks » Thu Oct 20, 2005 2:38 pm

Chris J wrote:
Machinate wrote: Some of the funkiest music out there is straight.
Huh ? certainly not...
Actually, Afrika Bambaata, Grandmaster Flash and Herbie Hancock all produced really funky tracks with drum machines of the day that were incapable of swing. They were perfectly rigid.

"Robot Funk". Yeah, it exists, just ask any B-Boy. I've done a few like that too, which while perfectly 100% quantized, got a feel to 'em that's funkier than yo mama's panty drawer.
http://www.garageband.com/song?|pe1|S8LTM0LdsaSnZlG3Zmk

:mrgreen:

If anybody cares, my other tracks are avail here in crapola 128 kb/s mp3s. Check "Icebreaker" for what I'm talking about regarding quantized funk.
http://www.garageband.com/artist/marcussterzer

I have changed my username; Now posting as:


M. Bréqs

Johnisfaster
Posts: 7251
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 8:34 am
Contact:

Post by Johnisfaster » Thu Oct 20, 2005 8:18 pm

definetly a nice track man I just checked it out. though as far as the topic goes I think it could use less stiffly quantised beats.. I hate to say that but even though it's funky it does sound stiff to me. not that I didn't like it. I do.
It was as if someone shook up a 6 foot can of blood soda and suddenly popped the top.

Johnisfaster
Posts: 7251
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 8:34 am
Contact:

Post by Johnisfaster » Thu Oct 20, 2005 8:21 pm

I'll probably get stoned for this but I think portishead and prodigy are excellent examples of how loose quantised beats can be really really groovin. I'm sure they focus greatly on the placement of sounds but not every hit is on the 16th or 32nd all the time which adds alot of energy to any beat.
It was as if someone shook up a 6 foot can of blood soda and suddenly popped the top.

Machinate
Posts: 11646
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 2:15 pm
Location: Denmark
Contact:

Post by Machinate » Thu Oct 20, 2005 9:13 pm

Johnisfaster wrote: even though it's funky it does sound stiff to me. not that I didn't like it. I do.
I'm not stoning anyone, I'm just highlighting this for the sake of illustrating the subjectivity of it all. It's funky, yet stiff - it could be unfunky, yet swung like a monkey. So it's all a matter of taste to me, until someone here posts a definition of funk based on some maths or something ;)

It's all good. And the music is still in teh mistaeks
mbp 2.66, osx 10.6.8, 8GB ram.

Johnisfaster
Posts: 7251
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 8:34 am
Contact:

Post by Johnisfaster » Thu Oct 20, 2005 9:42 pm

yes it is funky yet still, but I was pointing out the stiffness as a negaitve charactoristic. but it's just my opinion. but then I think all people like swing and most people don't even have the ear to recigise when they are hearing good slight swing yet they enjoy hearing it none the less.
It was as if someone shook up a 6 foot can of blood soda and suddenly popped the top.

Machinate
Posts: 11646
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 2:15 pm
Location: Denmark
Contact:

Post by Machinate » Thu Oct 20, 2005 9:51 pm

Johnisfaster wrote: but then I think all people like swing
me... not so much. I think a lot of electronica benefits greatly from a nice, firm mechanical pace.. if I wanted the human touch I'd use a 4-track ;)

Take the Doepfer Schaltwerk: Funky as hell, because you can move beats around on the fly, really quickly, like typing on a laptop, and you can really dig into the beat that way. Yet it hasn't got a swung chip anywhere in its system. So again... subjective...
mbp 2.66, osx 10.6.8, 8GB ram.

Johnisfaster
Posts: 7251
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 8:34 am
Contact:

Post by Johnisfaster » Thu Oct 20, 2005 10:03 pm

I'm not familiar with Doepfer Schaltwerk could you give me a link or something?
It was as if someone shook up a 6 foot can of blood soda and suddenly popped the top.

EARLGREY
Posts: 143
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2004 7:04 pm

Post by EARLGREY » Thu Oct 20, 2005 10:48 pm

IMHO 'funky' is not the same as 'Funk'. The stuff that turns a groove into a GROOVE is , stricly musically speaking, the aforementioned tension between various (rhytmical) intrumets in a song. Hence, the drumtrack CAN be a quantized loop as long as the other players stretch, pull & push a little.
If one adhers to the purists view, then the drummer must be human...Funk in its purest form will remain a band-effort with all it's interplay & fluctuations ( try warping 'the Payback' by JB ) , but the combination of a well-sequenced drumtrack and real musicians might come close....

regards

Machinate
Posts: 11646
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 2:15 pm
Location: Denmark
Contact:

Post by Machinate » Thu Oct 20, 2005 11:00 pm

Johnisfaster wrote:I'm not familiar with Doepfer Schaltwerk could you give me a link or something?
oh man oh man, don't get me started on the schalt... phew... and with the new sync option in live 5.02 I'm in heaven! Can't wait to power it up again!

old as hell, chip-wise, and "feature-wise", but it is the ruler on the interface alone!
http://www.doepfer.de/sw.htm
btw, I have it with the red LEDs, couldn't afford the blue edition ;)

I have a custom reaktor patch for triggering live recordings with it, brilliant! just hit a a key on your keyboard to record a sample, and instantly start sequencing it with the schalt! woohoo!! AAAAHHH!!! WEEEE! FUNKEEEEEH!

*ahem*... sorry... It is by far my most treasured piece of kit of all time.. love it to pieces.
mbp 2.66, osx 10.6.8, 8GB ram.

montrealbreaks
Posts: 995
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2004 11:38 pm
Location: Montreal Canada

Post by montrealbreaks » Fri Oct 21, 2005 2:39 am

Johnisfaster wrote:definetly a nice track man I just checked it out. though as far as the topic goes I think it could use less stiffly quantised beats.. I hate to say that but even though it's funky it does sound stiff to me. not that I didn't like it. I do.
Thanks for the input. Yeah, I normally do stuff with a lot of work put in to achieving a "human" groove - this track was particularly an experiment in what I could do with strict timing... I thought it worked out well, considering how strict it actually is. In fact, I think that's it's charm, and the charm of a lot of electro music... It's fun to dance like you're a robot sometimes!

Hence my term, "Robofunk"!

;)

I would love to take that one and put in some different beats just to hear it, but unfortunately I lost all of my old data in a catastrophic hard drive failure a few years back.

KIDS!!! REMEMBER TO BACKUP YOUR SHIT!!!

I have changed my username; Now posting as:


M. Bréqs

Chris J
Posts: 1353
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 5:24 pm

Re: ..

Post by Chris J » Fri Oct 21, 2005 12:25 pm

[quote="montrealbreaks"]Actually, Afrika Bambaata, Grandmaster Flash and Herbie Hancock all produced really funky tracks with drum machines of the day that were incapable of swing. They were perfectly rigid.

"Robot Funk". Yeah, it exists, just ask any B-Boy. I've done a few like that too, which while perfectly 100% quantized, got a feel to 'em that's funkier than yo mama's panty drawer.

Well as EARLGREY rightly describes, you may have some hard quantized beats as a base but things on top are better played "live" to keep it groovy.

Rock it by herbie Hancock : I 'm sure Mr Hancock's riff on the keyboard was NOT quantized, same for the scratching. At the same time it is very robotic on purpose, and not his funkiest track by miles.

Grandmaster Flash : well the rap is the rhythmic & funky element, and I don't think the synths are quantized either.

Steady simple beat coming from a drum machine and everything grooving on top.

I listened to the track, and sorry but don't find it funky at all
Quad 6600 Intel, AsusP5Q, 2Gb ram, XP sp3, Evolution MK361c & UC33e, Line6 UX8

montrealbreaks
Posts: 995
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2004 11:38 pm
Location: Montreal Canada

Re: ..

Post by montrealbreaks » Sat Nov 19, 2005 7:20 am

Chris J wrote: Well as EARLGREY rightly describes, you may have some hard quantized beats as a base but things on top are better played "live" to keep it groovy.

Rock it by herbie Hancock : I 'm sure Mr Hancock's riff on the keyboard was NOT quantized, same for the scratching. At the same time it is very robotic on purpose, and not his funkiest track by miles.

Grandmaster Flash : well the rap is the rhythmic & funky element, and I don't think the synths are quantized either.

Steady simple beat coming from a drum machine and everything grooving on top.

I listened to the track, and sorry but don't find it funky at all
Well, different strokes for different folks! Get's my ass movin...

;)

I have changed my username; Now posting as:


M. Bréqs

Post Reply