sketched experimentally this today

been sketching this today. kind of 2 tracks in one actually (if not 3). first one synth based, second one sample based, and the "third" has got samples & synths. was in an experimental mood . there are many many things still to work.

opinions and crit welcome :)

http://soundcloud.com/yan_g/unt058

liked all bits of it yan. especially the synthy second

thanks!

I like the production on all of this, the percussion and synth sounds are great (except for the lead toyish synths at 8:30 on in my opinion)

I enjoyed the first 2 ideas a lot but I strongly think they would be better if they weren't so "idm" un-quantized truffle shuffle confusing difficult to groove to at all.

Very cool. I also like how the percussions sound like they are free from trying to keep a conventional beat. Nice atmospheres and sounds.

  On 2/19/2011 at 6:30 AM, Blanket Fort Collapse said:

I like the production on all of this, the percussion and synth sounds are great (except for the lead toyish synths at 8:30 on in my opinion)

 

I enjoyed the first 2 ideas a lot but I strongly think they would be better if they weren't so "idm" un-quantized truffle shuffle confusing difficult to groove to at all.

  On 2/19/2011 at 6:52 AM, robotrobot said:

Very cool. I also like how the percussions sound like they are free from trying to keep a conventional beat. Nice atmospheres and sounds.

thanks for listening :)

actually that beat is the core of the first half of the piece. i run it into a delay and then i have an lfo switching randomly between the two channels. then i did the same for the synth. it's not a piece you're supposed to "groove" at. for groove check rather that one :) http://forum.watmm.com/topic/63718-renewal-offset/

Haha I could obviously hear that they were not intended/supposed to be groovy at all and I'm saying a little bit/a lot of intentional groove is what would make them more universally listenable and enjoyable for more humans/mindsets in my opinion.

  On 2/19/2011 at 5:05 PM, Blanket Fort Collapse said:

Haha I could obviously hear that they were not intended/supposed to be groovy at all and I'm saying a little bit/a lot of intentional groove is what would make them more universally listenable and enjoyable for more humans/mindsets in my opinion.

i hope you don't make music

  On 2/20/2011 at 2:10 AM, yanG said:

  On 2/19/2011 at 5:05 PM, Blanket Fort Collapse said:

Haha I could obviously hear that they were not intended/supposed to be groovy at all and I'm saying a little bit/a lot of intentional groove is what would make them more universally listenable and enjoyable for more humans/mindsets in my opinion.

i hope you don't make music

my point was: if i follow your reasoning we should all make the same popular crap.

i'd rather speak my mind to 1 person, than somebody else's to a crowd. some people, sometimes, do want to hear an ungroovable beat...

Just telling you MY opinion that I personally can only listen to disjointed dilapidated beats like in very rare states of mind and I don't think I'm alone in that perspective at all. Meeting it in the middle and making them a little more groovable wouldn't suddenly turn it into popular crap (lol) and destroy the vibe of your pieces in my opinion. I'm posting on Watmm, I obviously don't listen to or make typical popular crap. I'm a huge fan of Machine Drum whom makes very unquantized glitch hop but he does it in a groovy way that I can listen to on repeat with my my brain butt a shaking.

  On 2/20/2011 at 2:31 AM, Blanket Fort Collapse said:

Just telling you MY opinion that I personally can only listen to disjointed dilapidated beats like in very rare states of mind and I don't think I'm alone in that perspective at all. Meeting it in the middle and making them a little more groovable wouldn't suddenly turn it into popular crap (lol) and destroy the vibe of your pieces in my opinion.

i'm not saying it would suddenly turn into popular crap. i'm saying that if you aim at gaining wider audiences you end making crap music (there are a coupla exceptions though). but even if it's not the case, even if the track isn't crap, your message is corrupt because you've been focusing on what people like to hear instead of what you feel. it's leaving the field of art for that of entertainment.

and in the case of that track, adding some groove would indeed destroy its vibe, as you said:

  Quote

I could obviously hear that they were not intended/supposed to be groovy

yet you suggested i should put more groove. i don't like my expressions corrupt.

i found the beat hard to get but i liked that.

you still using reason yan?

smoothness

You are really not understanding where I am coming from or how I perceive the dynamics at play in making music for yourself while trying to be aware that you can maximize it's potential so that other people that don't usually like that kind of music would actually enjoy it. As I said you can meet things in the middle without compromising your integrity or vision. If you really want to make stuff really disjointed go ahead but that is my only criticism to bring to the table is that I can't really get into the random jitteryness of it and think if you made it a little more groovy I would enjoy it more and I don't think it would change the vibe much it would just sound more listenable.

If you quantized and smoothed out the grooves on those pieces it would sound only slight less dark, the huge majority of the vibe comes from the sounds chosen/created/manipulated, the melodic phrasing, structuring etc. In my opinion the rhythm being more digestible would just be that (more digestible) not vastly different atmospheric context

  On 2/20/2011 at 5:21 AM, yek said:

i found the beat hard to get but i liked that.

 

you still using reason yan?

yes, too lazy to move on to something else :)