BT - This Binary Universe.

Funkstar De Luxe · Post by **Funkstar De Luxe** » Fri Sep 01, 2006 2:49 pm

DeadlyKungFu wrote:
ethios4 wrote:
jyoty wrote:don't forget tori amos....i actually liked that track...super ethereal !
...he pieced the vocals together phoneme by phoneme...incredible!!

How would royalties work on that?

Did I mention

I smell bull shit there. A lot of producers tend to talk pish to people. Jimmy Edgar once told me he wrote viruses which corrupted audio files to make his music. Sure, james.

benjaminFlack · Post by **benjaminFlack** » Fri Sep 01, 2006 3:50 pm

i went to a screening of this the other day in chicago. BT was there, watched it with us, told us some cool things about it and did a Q&A afterwards.

the first track, all that makes us human continues, was writtten completely in csound, including mixing. he specifically said that he didn't even work out any melodies on a real instrument just to make it a straight transfer of mind to code to music. took about six months. he actually posted a bit of the code on his myspace blog a couple months back.

he mentioned that in the third track, the internal locus, you might hear something that sounds like granular synthesis. it's not. it's the drums/percussion from the entire track mashed down into a one bar loop.

and i don't know how this actually works out, though i know that classical composers have done it in some way before, but in 1.618 the entire track both musically and visually has the golden ratio all throughout.

timothyallan, he's actually putting out TWO plugins. one of them he did use on this album because the rythmic patterns he wanted to do would've taken for stinkin ever by hand. it's a 5.1, sample acurate drum plugin called break tweaker. the other one is specifically for live use, called stutter edit. he's been prototyping it live at his shows for some years now. i don't know anything about how it actually works/looks/whatever but i do know that it has grids for at least up to 2,048th notes.

jb61264, there is a cd/DVD release. go get that instead of the itunes stuff, especially if you have a surround system. i don't have one, but was lucky enough to go to that screening and hear it on a theater's system and there is a marked difference from that to the 2.0 cd mix. it makes sense, since the music was all mixed in 5.1 from the start.

anyways, there's some info, HERE is some more if you want it. this interview goes into a lot of details about things like time signatures and such, so it's a good read.

-Ben

Tranquil010 · Post by **Tranquil010** » Fri Sep 01, 2006 4:27 pm

www.thisbinaryuniverse.com

www.btnetwork.org

nuperspective · Post by **nuperspective** » Fri Sep 01, 2006 10:58 pm

benjaminFlack wrote:
and i don't know how this actually works out, though i know that classical composers have done it in some way before, but in 1.618 the entire track both musically and visually has the golden ratio all throughout.

-Ben

WTF is the golden ratio???????

never heard of that before.

Patrick DSP · Post by **Patrick DSP** » Fri Sep 01, 2006 11:40 pm

nuperspective wrote:
benjaminFlack wrote:
and i don't know how this actually works out, though i know that classical composers have done it in some way before, but in 1.618 the entire track both musically and visually has the golden ratio all throughout.

-Ben
WTF is the golden ratio???????

never heard of that before.

the golden ratio = 1.61803399 also known as phi about as common and mystical as it's brother... pi = 3.14159265

i haven't heard BT's track 1.618 but i'm sure he's tried to incorporate the magic number that is known as phi in there.
for some more info, google the word phi or check out this link if you're into math... http://jwilson.coe.uga.edu/EMT669/Stude ... ratio.html

blakflag · Post by **blakflag** » Sat Sep 02, 2006 1:12 pm

nuperspective wrote:
benjaminFlack wrote:
and i don't know how this actually works out, though i know that classical composers have done it in some way before, but in 1.618 the entire track both musically and visually has the golden ratio all throughout.

-Ben
WTF is the golden ratio???????

never heard of that before.

Visually, take a rectangle where the long side = 1.618 * short side. If you subtract a square (sides = short side) off the long side of the rectangle, the remainder is a smaller version of the same rectangle. (only now the long side is the length of the former short side).

Many classical artists used this ratio all over their paintings, believing (correctly) that it leads to a sense of optimum visual proportions. Who knows why, but it seems to work.

b0unce · Post by **b0unce** » Sat Sep 02, 2006 1:24 pm

your sub-conscious (probably) perceives the anomoly and registers pleasure in your cerebral cortex and releases endorphins as a result or something.

I was gonna mention that rectangle illustration you refer to, its kind of like an oblique spiral ...a snails shell, or some sea shells you find at the beach....the golden ratio is found in lots of areas in life....if time were stretching or contorting somehow, I bet if you graphed it you would see the golden ratio. its almost everywhere...

I would like to get a book on the subject

nuperspective · Post by **nuperspective** » Sat Sep 02, 2006 1:35 pm

i know what your talking about now. never heard it called the golden ratio before. centre of a sunflower etc

jyoty · Post by **jyoty** » Sat Sep 02, 2006 6:43 pm

i don't see what all the fuss is about.. the album is good...bt is very talented...but it's background music.

udp · Post by **udp** » Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:02 pm

jyoty wrote:i don't see what all the fuss is about.. the album is good...bt is very talented...but it's background music.

No offense, but you need to listen again. This album is deep. Some dismissed Emotional Technology as pop fluff, but wnt back and listened 6-12 months later only to delight in its depth and multiple styles. Here, Bt has compacted his pallette. He takes the listener through a vast array of styles in each track. There are knew sounds, and form which weren't there in previous albums. Just because it doesn't make you dance, doesn't make it background music.

On another note, the golden ratio was used to a tee by Bela Bartok. It places the high point (climax) of the music at approximately 2/3 of the way through. This is supposedly sub-consciously pleasing to the listener. I believe it to be true.

nuperspective · Post by **nuperspective** » Sun Sep 03, 2006 12:02 am

jyoty wrote:i don't see what all the fuss is about.. the album is good...bt is very talented...but it's background music.

there is no way this can be called background music. the array of ideas and way they are put together is both dizzing and sublime. the shear number of time signatures in use is a lesson to us all.

but:

sure. its not an insantly gratifing album to listen to and theres no dancefloor rockers on there a la the chemicals or fatboy [excuse the example]. you may even go as far as concept album.

but:

its is deep and the more your listen to it the more rewarding it becomes. im no muso or classically trained and i missed half of the things in there first time around. only on reading this thread and the website did i go back for a second and third listen. its definately broadened my horizons. i only wish i had a 5.1 system so i could listen to the full version.

this is not a throw away album and is well worth a purchase, by anybody who loves electronic music and timeless edition to any collection. yes i said timeless - as its so radically different to anything the mainstream is pumping out and you can keep going back to it.

rant time:

as for bt i dont care what you say hes always one step ahead of the curve. while 90% of the electronic music artists in the world are doing wanky fucking electro house or cheesy remixes of eighties records [that were shite the first time round]. the guy comes up with something like this.

late breaking news:

the light at the end of the tunnel has not gone out. electronic music is alive and well thanks to people like bt!

b0unce · Post by **b0unce** » Sun Sep 03, 2006 12:40 am

is it just me or is BT virtually unheard of in europe ?
I'm not into trance tho....

everyone says he's ahead of the game, better then ventian snares or aphex twin ?
I suppose I got to listen for myself

I dont know why he's got to plug his technology all the time tho, it seems like he or his PR people are over compensating for something.... virtually every article I found is full of techy-wank.

aliasA · Post by **aliasA** » Sun Sep 03, 2006 1:31 am

b0unce wrote:is it just me or is BT virtually unheard of in europe ?
I'm not into trance tho....

everyone says he's ahead of the game, better then ventian snares or aphex twin ?
I suppose I got to listen for myself

I dont know why he's got to plug his technology all the time tho, it seems like he or his PR people are over compensating for something.... virtually every article I found is full of techy-wank.

I think this album officially puts BT way ahead of anyone like aphex twin. And i love aphex twin.

I dont think he plugs that much at all. Sure, alot of interviews you read talk about it, but thats just cause the interviewer will ask DO YOU WRITE ANY OF YOUR OWN SOFTWARE. Its not like he walking around with t-shirts with a company name on them. ive seen far worse before. Remember like 6 months before snatch came out, Madonna wore that t-shirt every time u saw her. crazy bitch probably had 1,000 of them.

nuperspective · Post by **nuperspective** » Sun Sep 03, 2006 1:42 am

i dont think its relevant to discuss interview technique, but while we are on the topic has anybody read the aphex interview in future music? what a complete tosser he sounded like - talented or not. at least bt will discuss technique and work methods and not keep them top secret afraid to share them with the world.

b0unce · Post by **b0unce** » Sun Sep 03, 2006 2:03 am

you make an interesting point , nuper

aphex gives nothing away, but he doesnt have to, no one does I suppose but its nice when they do - I'll settle for just being able to listen to his stuff. I dunno....I'm always dubious of any art or craft where it seems the emphasis is on the technology used in its creation and not the art itself, the end product, the picture, the tune.

and I said ARTICLES, not just strictly INTERVIEWS. even third parties just writing about him (no interview) - its all tech tech tech I noticed....

"Its not like he walking around with t-shirts with a company name on them"

classy.