Izotope StutterEdit: How do you make use of it?

[Wunjo]

Hey guys, first off I'd like to say that we are carpenters of sorts and a tool is a tool regardless of how "mainstream" or genre-specific it may be. My question isn't really geared towards what you think about StutterEdit but how you personally use it.

I know that when using this device you have to have an audio track with audio on it and you also have to have a seperate midi track with the midi being routed to the first audio track in order to take advantage of the effects. My question is:

What kind of audio do you guys like to use for manipulation?

I sometimes use a rendered clip of the actual song or a drum beat or drone noises, etc..

Your thoughts and techniques?

[salatspinatra]

The verdict is still out on StutterEdit. On one hand, glitch is no longer a novelty, and any self-respecting dj or producer will want to have tricks of their own rather than cookie cutter, trodden-on paths. On the other hand, newcombers will leap frog all the agonizing hours you spent trying to learn or program your gear with the press of a button, and who are you if you don't try to keep up with the jonezes. (I go back to playing tennis with a wooden racket, so you can imagine what it felt like when some preppy kid stepped on the court with an oversized Prince head. Now everything is graphite and relatively oversized. Despite the fact that more people get injured with the new equipment, the competitors all embraced the upside.) The neutral territory is to appreciate that its a decent bundle of effects with some good consideration to sound quality (including the filter), and if you can afford it and it honestly saves you some cycles to replace a chunk of your INTENDED effects in this manner, then go for it.

When you instantly recognize it on every sell-out (as in your soul) pop song, then we'll know it's the finger that pulled the trigger.

Just about any demo of it thus far is meant to show you every build-up conceivable in a 3-min youtube video. This lacks much taste. In truth, it's probably best used like a spice rack: in a pinch to mark milestones in a set or for a single breakdown in a song. That's literally one tap on a keyboard, for those who can resist the temptation of playing it, or can afford dedicating a keyboard to just sit there most of the time. Just wait 'til really tacky dj's (as in, deserving of a comment on tosh.O) abuse this rule of thumb, and you'll get my meaning (I never said I wasn't opinionated). Only way so far where I would safely disregard this advice is if I was using the note matrix to create modular changes to the song.

First thing to do would be to make patches of your own and get to understand each module. I would suggest putting the generator on your black keys, and the stutter effects on the white. Then it will be clear which polyphonic combinations will be available to you. Furthermore, you'd probably also want to adjust the dry/wet mix level which is controlled by separate modules, depending on whether you want to work within a mix, or as an insert. (The gate module is not as analogous to the gate mode that you might be familiar with.) Some styles of edit will disregard your mix and sound patchy and out of place if you don't consider these levels.

I like your idea of breaking down drones, if simply to bring variation to a sustained loop. As for intended genres, listen to Sufjan Steven's latest album and the track "Too Much." Whether you like the tune or not, there's hardly anything about the song to inform you that glitch would work so well for it, but it does.

Hope that helps.

[Brian Ffar]

Place it on your master out or on a bus mix.
Control it from an armed midi channel
Customize each preset or roll your own and save

Control live using midi controller or keyboard.

wash. rinse. (beat)repeat.

[Wunjo]

Place it on your master out or on a bus mix.
Control it from an armed midi channel
Customize each preset or roll your own and save

Control live using midi controller or keyboard.

wash. rinse. (beat)repeat.

Well I was more interested in what types of audio people have found to have the most interesting results. I think putting it on the master and glitching the whole song as opposed to a backing part is what the other poster was warning people of abusing. Because this effect is no pronounced I was curious as to how people have come up with innovative ways to disguise it or complement the sound.

[Rave]

The innovative way is to not use it and do something else. Sorry but every kid with a cracked copy will be hammering it just like beat repeat and the djm 600 flanger i.e. it gets old fast.

[glitchrock-buddha]

The innovative way is to not use it and do something else. Sorry but every kid with a cracked copy will be hammering it just like beat repeat and the djm 600 flanger i.e. it gets old fast.

Ya but a lot of people have used a 303 as well. It's not always the same old same old. You can actually use overused things in interesting ways. Massive attack used to use a 303 quite a bit but I don't think it made them less innovative.

[Rave]

Nah

[Brian Ffar]

I love how people try and "warn" you about something that doesn't matter. Avoiding plugins doesn't validate someone as an artist. There are plenty of major label producers that don't give a shit what others think and use plug ins (millions of them) all of the time and they're doing just fine whether other board members like their music or not.

Use scenario as a wake up call. You're an artist no matter what plugs you use, and there will be a pool of people (perhaps large or small) that will like what you do.

Fuck the rest. The only reason why someone would tell you to avoid using something is so they can push their opinion on you to conform to their values and feel better about their decisions.

[BBR]

I love how people try and "warn" you about something that doesn't matter. Avoiding plugins doesn't validate someone as an artist. There are plenty of major label producers that don't give a shit what others think and use plug ins (millions of them) all of the time and they're doing just fine whether other board members like their music or not.

Use scenario as a wake up call. You're an artist no matter what plugs you use, and there will be a pool of people (perhaps large or small) that will like what you do.

Fuck the rest. The only reason why someone would tell you to avoid using something is so they can push their opinion on you to conform to their values and feel better about their decisions.

truth.

I haven't had the time to explore stutter edit, but I'm really excited to figure out how to use it.

[jellycaster]

I feel like stutter edit has the potential to be a really expressive tool. but i also feel like putting it on the master bus at the end of every 8 bars is a recipe for homogeniety.

So far, I have grouped a couple of tracks (for example, bass and drums or pads and leads) and put an instance on the group rather than individual tracks or the master. I have also tried to keep the number of gestures down to a minimum (maybe 3 over a 3/4 minute track) to make it sound composed and coherent.

I used it quite a bit on my remix of everything everything’s ‘final form’. Feel free to have a listen and let me know what you think. In this track, instead of using it as for build ups, I have used to create variations in the rhythm section.

http://www.soundcloud.com/tlsm

[recyclinglostcities]

I've only been using it for a few weeks, but I've gotten good results out of it by putting it on the master, running a few tracks through it, playing with the sounds, and resampling. I agree that it is sort of a "cheat" if you are just putting it on your master for a completed track and "insert glitch sound here".

[The Northern Contingent]

I'm not sure that plugins like this are somehow 'cheating'. Don't we all 'cheat' just by making electronic music? Isn't it 'cheating' when you sample a drum sound or a bass part or a string section and use it in your track? Shouldn't we all learn the 'original' instruments they were sampled from and play 'real' music for a change? Of course not.

The distinction that some technology makes 'real' music and other technology is 'fake' is one that breaks down very quickly when it given even the most gentle interrogation. What matters are the results produced at the end of it all. Predictable approaches will make predictable music - the idea that using a particular tool is 'cheating' is misplaced criticism.

[Cezband]

The distinction that some technology makes 'real' music and other technology is 'fake' is one that breaks down very quickly when it given even the most gentle interrogation.

Very well put.

[beats me]

I get pissed off when rock music features distorted guitars playing chords that have already been played in other songs. FFS been there, done that!!

[Theo Void]

I get pissed off when rock music features distorted guitars playing chords that have already been played in other songs. FFS been there, done that!!

I know right, and I can't stand all these artists using effects pedals and microphones and shit. WTF. They're all so phony. REAL MUSICIANS use drums made from animal hide that they stretched over a piece of wood.