From: owner-idealcopy-digest@smoe.org (idealcopy-digest) To: idealcopy-digest@smoe.org Subject: idealcopy-digest V3 #353 Reply-To: idealcopy@smoe.org Sender: owner-idealcopy-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-idealcopy-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk idealcopy-digest Saturday, November 25 2000 Volume 03 : Number 353 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: [idealcopy] our project [MarkBursa@aol.com] Re: [idealcopy] List Members unite whether musician or not!!! [MarkBursa@] [idealcopy] OT ; polly etc [PaulRabjohn@aol.com] Re: [idealcopy] List Members unite whether musician or not!!! [Stephen Ha] Re: [idealcopy] List Members unite whether musician or not!!! [Eardrumbuz] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 05:51:09 EST From: MarkBursa@aol.com Subject: Re: [idealcopy] our project Tim, << i will also determine how many tracks (and of what length) to send. i don't need to dictate this though. i just want to post it so everyone knows what to do. it can certainly be decided on by the group. i just feel strongly about the one thing, that the length of each track is the guiding factor in it's creation. >> Whoa! I totally disagree with your last statement (hey! musical differences already!). Track length is totally irrelevant. (cf Crazy about Love vs Field day for the Sundays) If you want to create a track that is 4 mis 34 seconds long, fine. If it souynds good, the rest of the group will certainly contribute to it. But I reserve the right to make my contribution whatever length I choose. As an extreme example, say Graeme Rowland produced a 30-minute ring-modulator-mulched mantra. I might take a 4-bar loop and turn it into a 2-minute pop song, adding a guitar part. You might remix the pop song into a dance track. And someone else might take a 10 second sample of the dance track and mulch it into a 30-minute ambient track. That's how I see it evolving, not someone acting as self-appointed group leader telling everone it's in the key of C sharp, or that it runs at 120bpm. >> thanks for your support. this is something i've wanted to do for years. it looks like it will finally come to being. >> I certainly hope so! mark ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 06:03:05 EST From: MarkBursa@aol.com Subject: Re: [idealcopy] List Members unite whether musician or not!!! Paul, << thank you! couldn't have said it better. and besides, i don't have any digital music making equipment! also, i do want to set a duration for the song or songs, however many we create. that is the only foundation required. of course, no one has to play for the entire length of a track, but having a set time allows people to place their sounds where they want them within the song. >> I totally agree with you re equipment. Not everyone has a Mac with Cubase etc. But I do disagree about trying to enforce structure. What I'd personally like to see is a situation where whatever anyone has to offer can be uploaded to a web site somewhere for download in a universal format (WAV or MP3), for others to use as they see fit. Someone was offering drum tracks for example, which would be a good starting point. Someone else may have a small sample, or a loop of noise. Somoeone might want to combine two elements and upload that back. Or someone may want to add guitar and bass tracks to the drums. So what if we get 40 versions of the same song ;-) I think that's the beauty of the concept. A mutating, changing project rather than an attempt to create "a song". In my experience of being in bands, the more stuff you throw at the wall the better the results, especially when we're dealing with a large group of people with a wide difference in tastes. As an extreme example, if someone decided that whatever we do was based on a rhythm track that I didn't like, I would not contribute. In a band situation, the song would inevitably be junked. So allow for flexibility, please. Also, there may be some on the list who aren't musicians but could contribute lyrics (sorry...texts, to use Lewisspeak!). I'd happily be the Newman to someone's Lewis! Mark ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 10:10:45 EST From: PaulRabjohn@aol.com Subject: [idealcopy] OT ; polly etc just to say pj harvey is on NME TV tonight , on bravo (!) at 10.30 and repeated a couple of times over the weekend. i watched this show a couple of weeks ago and it was a typical bravo tit n bum number ; god knows why the nme chose them as bedfellows. still , pj might be worth a look. "marc" has finished now (last week was the classic bowie episode) , instead you get supersonic again. must be up to the punk era soon which could be fun. p ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 07:48:13 -0800 (PST) From: Stephen Harper Subject: Re: [idealcopy] List Members unite whether musician or not!!! Mark, This sounds more interesting to me; I have some Wire-inspired texts that might be serviceable... Stephen > Also, there may be some on the list who aren't > musicians but could contribute > lyrics (sorry...texts, to use Lewisspeak!). I'd > happily be the Newman to > someone's Lewis! > > Mark ===== Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. http://shopping.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 21:41:42 EST From: Eardrumbuz@aol.com Subject: Re: [idealcopy] List Members unite whether musician or not!!! In a message dated 11/24/0 6:36:03 AM, Mark Bursa writes: >whatever anyone has to offer can be uploaded to a web site somewhere for >download in a universal format (WAV or MP3), for others to use as they >see fit. Someone was offering drum tracks for example, which would be a >good starting point. Someone else may have a small sample, or a loop of >noise. Somoeone might want to combine two elements and upload that back. >Or someone may want to add guitar and bass tracks to the drums. So what >if we get 40 versions of the same song ;-) I think that's the beauty of >the concept. A mutating, changing project rather than an attempt to create >"a song". i do like the sound of this, although it's a quite different concept than what i had proposed to the group. what is described above leaves little or nothing to chance. the element of chance is what i find most exciting. my idea will, no doubt, result in something more like a plasmatics jam session (where they each went into separate sound proof rooms) with an in esse feel to it (since we are potentially many more than 2 gtrs, 1 bass, 1 drummer). for those of us who may be unfamiliar with the surrealist "exquisite corpse" technique: a picture (or text) is created by several people, each one adding to the work without seeing what the others have done before them. this is achieved by folding the paper as you go along. what i proposed is similar, in that no one hears what the others have recorded. the assembler is merely a technician who layers all the tracks to make one piece. things like the levels and panning could even be randomized. that is why i want the length of the piece determined before we start. then everyone's recordings can be synched and the piece is done. whatever comes out is what it is. maybe we could agree (some of us at least) to do it this way first, and then one person with the proper equipment could put all the individual tracks up for download or sampling or whatever. i thought it was great when several listers offered to mix the tracks. then we could possibly get 40 versions of say... 1:54 of noise :o) i appreciate the input, and i'll go along with whatever the group decides together. i just hope i have the technical ability to join in. - -paul c.d. ------------------------------ End of idealcopy-digest V3 #353 *******************************