This past weekend I had the opportunity to start some music writing again. I honestly have to say that the endeavor was not very successful. I made some interesting sounds here and there, but nothing that really stood together. I am also currently looking for some software ideas to begin a little work on my laptop. Since I am not commuting to and from class this year and will being commuting to and from work within the next two weeks I have a lot of small junks of free time. Almost no time will be spent at home at my gear. I got to say I am not sure really where I want to go with this. I was at first going to explore .:Gleetchplug:., but unfortunately it is no longer freeware and version 2.0 is not out yet. I am now looking at a few of the audio programming languages such as .:Impromptu:. and .:Chuck:., but I don't know if that is the direction or commitment I want to take. Ideally I would like to get something like Nanoloop for my laptop. Maybe such a software doesn't exist?Tags: music thoughts software
Whew. I have finally handed in my graduate thesis today. I am very glad it is over with. I have posted the entire .PDf file online for anyone who is intrested in downloading it. I can't wait to get to work on some music again. With any luck I will hopefully have some small shows setup this fall in cafes..:Analyzing GIS Based on Orgaizational Location:.Well hope you like it.Tags: graduate thesis GIS
So many of you have probably wondering where they heck have I been? Well the last semester of school started and it is a pretty cruel one with my thesis wrapping up and all sorts of other issues piling on top. One great news event however is that my Capstone Thesis, that I have been working on for the past six months, is finally finished. I am just waiting for final approval, but I should hopefully hand it in on Monday and be done with it. I am starting to get onto the last leg of grad school which I am very much thankful for. Things are beginning to change and I probably have a job lined up for after graduation. I begin working with the new company in the middle of October part time and with any luck it will become full-time after graduation. I think the ball really rests in my corner for this. I will hopefully have some more free-time now and I would love to get out and begin performing some live music once again. It has been over a year since I last performed and since the release of my new net-album .:Colored Faceless:. I have a lot of material that I would love to get playing again. I will hopefully try to get post my thesis online for everyone in case you are bored enough to actually read through forty seven pages of material.Tags: relief thesis complete
Colored faceless is the new album from Dynamic Interplay created with the mindset of minimalism and simplicity at its core. The music has been stripped back to its core sound and was composed live “as is” with only three pieces of gear and minimal post processing.
Tracklisting
- The Light in Your Eyes
- Be Still
- Finder Fip Top
- The Chinese Connection
- Light Waves
- Flutter By
- Raging Bull
- The Tranquility Alternative
- Caught on a Rainbow
All Tracks (c) Matthew A. Supert 2006 unless otherwise noted. All work including music and artwork is released under Creative Commons sharealike license 2.5. For more information please visit the .:Creative Commons 2.5 Deed:. for this webpage.
Colored faceless is the new album from Dynamic Interplay created with the mindset of minimalism and simplicity at its core. The music has been stripped back to its core sound and was composed live "as is" with only three pieces of gear and minimal post processing. Download the entire album .:Here:.Tracklisting
.:The Light In Your Eyes:.
.:Be Still:.
.:Finder Fip Top:.
.:The Chinese Connection:.
.:Light Waves:.
.:Flutter By:.
.:Raging Bull:.
.:The Tranquility Alternative:.
.:Caught on a Rainbow
Artwork
.:Cover Art:.
.:Insert 1:.
.:Insert 2:.
.:Insert 3:.All Tracks (c) Matthew A. Supert 2006 unless otherwise noted. All work including music and artwork is released under Creative Commons sharealike license 2.5. For more information please visit the .:Creative Commons 2.5 Deed:. for this webpage.Tags: Dynamic Interplay album Colored Faceless
The following article is part of an eight part series exploring my thoughts on the state of electronic music in the current decade compared to the 1990's and 1980's.
--------------------------------------------------------------Perhaps the number one reason for the state of electronic music as it exists today is because of the artists. In short, I think we have become lazy, complacent and shallow. We have been presented with one of the rarest opportunities in the history of music: the personal computer and the internet. We have the cheapest tools ever and the largest audience possible and we have failed to take our genre to the next level.The very problem with the artists could be the sheer fact of the masses now involved in music creation. Just about any shmoe can go out, get a computer, download some software and make music. While this is fantastic on many levels it is also horrific to the artisan community on other levels. As with any mass effect in culture, mediocrity is the mainstay of the masses. In this respect we have a dual effect pressing down upon the electronic music community to create predictable mediocre music. More and more artists from the mass population, which have mass culture aesthetics for music, are entering the music creation scene. Their aim, as artists, is to perpetuate the status quo of the current sound, the sound which they like at the moment. While more and more people are coming to the table to play, new ideas are not following to that same table. Those masses that are entering the field are bringing the same ideas as currently exist creating the mass media effect of a self perpetuating cycle of recycled music folding in upon itself. Case in point: how many artists online have you heard say; "I just want to make banging dance tunes!!!" Well making a banging dance tune is great and all, but what do banging dance tunes do for the growth, innovation and maturity of the scene and its music? Many readers at this point may think I am a pretentious elitist ass, but I ask you, especially the producers out there to think for a moment about the reason you make music. I don't expect everyone to go out and change the world or make a new sound with their music, but if all you want to do is "Make a banging dance track", why donÂ?t you try to create a fresh new sound or idea rather then post online asking people "how to I re-create this Ferry Corsten lead for my banging dance track?"Other Chapters in this writing:
.:Part I:The Decade That Should Have Been:.
.:Part II:Where Electronic Music Was:.
.:Part III:Who is to Blame?:.
.:Part IV: The Sound:.
.:Part V: The Tools:.
.:Part VI: Internet:.
.:Part VII: The Artists:.
.:Part VIII: The Birth of the Renaissance:.Stay Tuned for Part VIII: The Need for a Renaissance
Tags: The Electronic Renaissance Part VII: The Artists Article
--------------------------------------------------------------Perhaps the number one reason for the state of electronic music as it exists today is because of the artists. In short, I think we have become lazy, complacent and shallow. We have been presented with one of the rarest opportunities in the history of music: the personal computer and the internet. We have the cheapest tools ever and the largest audience possible and we have failed to take our genre to the next level.The very problem with the artists could be the sheer fact of the masses now involved in music creation. Just about any shmoe can go out, get a computer, download some software and make music. While this is fantastic on many levels it is also horrific to the artisan community on other levels. As with any mass effect in culture, mediocrity is the mainstay of the masses. In this respect we have a dual effect pressing down upon the electronic music community to create predictable mediocre music. More and more artists from the mass population, which have mass culture aesthetics for music, are entering the music creation scene. Their aim, as artists, is to perpetuate the status quo of the current sound, the sound which they like at the moment. While more and more people are coming to the table to play, new ideas are not following to that same table. Those masses that are entering the field are bringing the same ideas as currently exist creating the mass media effect of a self perpetuating cycle of recycled music folding in upon itself. Case in point: how many artists online have you heard say; "I just want to make banging dance tunes!!!" Well making a banging dance tune is great and all, but what do banging dance tunes do for the growth, innovation and maturity of the scene and its music? Many readers at this point may think I am a pretentious elitist ass, but I ask you, especially the producers out there to think for a moment about the reason you make music. I don't expect everyone to go out and change the world or make a new sound with their music, but if all you want to do is "Make a banging dance track", why donÂ?t you try to create a fresh new sound or idea rather then post online asking people "how to I re-create this Ferry Corsten lead for my banging dance track?"Other Chapters in this writing:
.:Part I:The Decade That Should Have Been:.
.:Part II:Where Electronic Music Was:.
.:Part III:Who is to Blame?:.
.:Part IV: The Sound:.
.:Part V: The Tools:.
.:Part VI: Internet:.
.:Part VII: The Artists:.
.:Part VIII: The Birth of the Renaissance:.Stay Tuned for Part VIII: The Need for a Renaissance
Tags: The Electronic Renaissance Part VII: The Artists Article
The following article is part of an eight part series exploring my thoughts on the state of electronic music in the current decade compared to the 1990's and 1980's.
--------------------------------------------------------------One of the other largest contributors to the problem of stale music is the internet. The internet has afforded artists with one of the most crucial distribution and networking tools ever to be seen in the world. It was the hope of many (not just musicians) that information will disseminate freely, folding in upon itself to create more ideas and information, and while on many levels that has occurred, there are plenty of examples of information converging under what I like to call the "Lemming Effect". In the Lemming Effect uninformed persons make decisions based on the most popular information present. From this they simply add to the majority opinion and perpetuate a false sense of superiority, squeezing out minority points of information and strengthening the majority's point. Going back to my previous example with the music .:message boards:. and the software recommendations we can plainly see this occurring. For example's sake lets look at one of the most common questions I see on messageboards online: What synth should I use? A user will log into a board asking what synth plugin they can use to create a trance lead. They get bombarded with recommendations for Z3ta, or Pro53, or Vaz. They download the plug in and use it haphazardly joining the majority opinion often times without exploring other options of synths they could use and they then become ingrained in the cycle of the "Lemming Effect" hence forth haphazardly then recommending that synth to every other user who asks for insight. What is important I think in this point of view is not the fact that they chose Z3ta, often times there are good reasons why certain pieces of software are highly regarded, but that they chose Z3ta without trying alternatives. Surprisingly one will find while on music discussion boards online that users will not only advocate the decision they dove into, but even criticize the options they did not even bother trying when they find themselves on the advice giving end of the equation. One such instance occurred several months ago on a discussion board that I participated in regarding Apple's Garageband. Someone posted a question asking how good Garageband was for music creation (software only). Several users immediately posted replies stating how it was a terrible program based around loops and that it did not amount much more to eJay software that has no music creation or editing capabilities. Being an active member of this board I knew many of the members who posted and nearly all of them were Windows only users. Their experience with Garageband was non-existent, yet based on their software decisions (in this case it was Fruityloops which held approximately a 90% share on this board), they blindly ridiculed the software based on their perception of it. After being confronted in the post by me they admitted that they had in fact never used Garageband before and were basing their recommendation on their own personal perspective of the software. While specific motives for this reaction to the software are unknown to me, I believe their reaction was a prime example of the "Lemming Effect".
Other Chapters in this writing:
.:Part I:The Decade That Should Have Been:.
.:Part II:Where Electronic Music Was:.
.:Part III:Who is to Blame?:.
.:Part IV: The Sound:.
.:Part V: The Tools:.
.:Part VI: Internet:.
.:Part VII: The Artists:.
.:Part VIII: The Birth of the Renaissance:.Stay Tuned for Part VII: The Artists
Tags: The Electronic Renaissance Part V: The Internet Article
--------------------------------------------------------------One of the other largest contributors to the problem of stale music is the internet. The internet has afforded artists with one of the most crucial distribution and networking tools ever to be seen in the world. It was the hope of many (not just musicians) that information will disseminate freely, folding in upon itself to create more ideas and information, and while on many levels that has occurred, there are plenty of examples of information converging under what I like to call the "Lemming Effect". In the Lemming Effect uninformed persons make decisions based on the most popular information present. From this they simply add to the majority opinion and perpetuate a false sense of superiority, squeezing out minority points of information and strengthening the majority's point. Going back to my previous example with the music .:message boards:. and the software recommendations we can plainly see this occurring. For example's sake lets look at one of the most common questions I see on messageboards online: What synth should I use? A user will log into a board asking what synth plugin they can use to create a trance lead. They get bombarded with recommendations for Z3ta, or Pro53, or Vaz. They download the plug in and use it haphazardly joining the majority opinion often times without exploring other options of synths they could use and they then become ingrained in the cycle of the "Lemming Effect" hence forth haphazardly then recommending that synth to every other user who asks for insight. What is important I think in this point of view is not the fact that they chose Z3ta, often times there are good reasons why certain pieces of software are highly regarded, but that they chose Z3ta without trying alternatives. Surprisingly one will find while on music discussion boards online that users will not only advocate the decision they dove into, but even criticize the options they did not even bother trying when they find themselves on the advice giving end of the equation. One such instance occurred several months ago on a discussion board that I participated in regarding Apple's Garageband. Someone posted a question asking how good Garageband was for music creation (software only). Several users immediately posted replies stating how it was a terrible program based around loops and that it did not amount much more to eJay software that has no music creation or editing capabilities. Being an active member of this board I knew many of the members who posted and nearly all of them were Windows only users. Their experience with Garageband was non-existent, yet based on their software decisions (in this case it was Fruityloops which held approximately a 90% share on this board), they blindly ridiculed the software based on their perception of it. After being confronted in the post by me they admitted that they had in fact never used Garageband before and were basing their recommendation on their own personal perspective of the software. While specific motives for this reaction to the software are unknown to me, I believe their reaction was a prime example of the "Lemming Effect".
Other Chapters in this writing:
.:Part I:The Decade That Should Have Been:.
.:Part II:Where Electronic Music Was:.
.:Part III:Who is to Blame?:.
.:Part IV: The Sound:.
.:Part V: The Tools:.
.:Part VI: Internet:.
.:Part VII: The Artists:.
.:Part VIII: The Birth of the Renaissance:.Stay Tuned for Part VII: The Artists
Tags: The Electronic Renaissance Part V: The Internet Article
The following article is part of an eight part series exploring my thoughts on the state of electronic music in the current decade compared to the 1990's and 1980's.
--------------------------------------------------------------In some aspects I blame the modern pop music world for this problem, creating a listening expectation of the overly polished track, but the other blame is the software environment in which most music is now composed. While the software environment presents more and more opportunities for artists, the actual tools being used by artists appear to be diminishing. Visiting most music production communities online and searching their posts, you will find that the recommendation of tools follows its own trend: Absynth, Z3ta, Vaz, Fruityloops, Reason, Pro Logic etc. These are trends narrowing the sound palate in an environment that should instead be expanding the palate. While hundreds of sequencers probably exist on the internet for users, a common ten or less are used by probably 90% or more of the user base. Even within these ten most common packages, the software utilizes the same audio processing techniques and engines for competitive reasons, hence creating nearly the same sound. Years ago artists would experiment in various recording formats, with different microphone setups and different studios to try to achieve that unique sound for their music. Perhaps ironically that attitude has now changed to an attitude to if your music doesn't sound like someone else's then it is a bad piece. For example, Propellerhead's Reason is a popular software platform for many artists, particularly electronic artists, that often times receives criticism that its audio engine is not up to par with other "industry standards". Many artists, professional or otherwise, feel the need to bounce audio out of Reason into another piece of software for rendering to achieve that "polished sound" they so desire. What strikes me as astonishing is that artists feel the need to standardize the sound to a common denominator rather then utilize the unique sound characteristics of the platform itself. Imagine for a second the absurdity of someone not liking the analog audio output of a Moog Voyager, so they grafted on a USB port so they could directly record the analog sound digitally. The whole sound characteristic and purpose of the tool becomes lost in the manic need of standardization.Other Chapters in this writing:
.:Part I:The Decade That Should Have Been:.
.:Part II:Where Electronic Music Was:.
.:Part III:Who is to Blame?:.
.:Part IV: The Sound:.
.:Part V: The Tools:.
.:Part VI: Internet:.
.:Part VII: The Artists:.
.:Part VIII: The Birth of the Renaissance:.Stay Tuned for Part VI: The Internet
Tags: The Electronic Renaissance Part V: The Tools Article
--------------------------------------------------------------In some aspects I blame the modern pop music world for this problem, creating a listening expectation of the overly polished track, but the other blame is the software environment in which most music is now composed. While the software environment presents more and more opportunities for artists, the actual tools being used by artists appear to be diminishing. Visiting most music production communities online and searching their posts, you will find that the recommendation of tools follows its own trend: Absynth, Z3ta, Vaz, Fruityloops, Reason, Pro Logic etc. These are trends narrowing the sound palate in an environment that should instead be expanding the palate. While hundreds of sequencers probably exist on the internet for users, a common ten or less are used by probably 90% or more of the user base. Even within these ten most common packages, the software utilizes the same audio processing techniques and engines for competitive reasons, hence creating nearly the same sound. Years ago artists would experiment in various recording formats, with different microphone setups and different studios to try to achieve that unique sound for their music. Perhaps ironically that attitude has now changed to an attitude to if your music doesn't sound like someone else's then it is a bad piece. For example, Propellerhead's Reason is a popular software platform for many artists, particularly electronic artists, that often times receives criticism that its audio engine is not up to par with other "industry standards". Many artists, professional or otherwise, feel the need to bounce audio out of Reason into another piece of software for rendering to achieve that "polished sound" they so desire. What strikes me as astonishing is that artists feel the need to standardize the sound to a common denominator rather then utilize the unique sound characteristics of the platform itself. Imagine for a second the absurdity of someone not liking the analog audio output of a Moog Voyager, so they grafted on a USB port so they could directly record the analog sound digitally. The whole sound characteristic and purpose of the tool becomes lost in the manic need of standardization.Other Chapters in this writing:
.:Part I:The Decade That Should Have Been:.
.:Part II:Where Electronic Music Was:.
.:Part III:Who is to Blame?:.
.:Part IV: The Sound:.
.:Part V: The Tools:.
.:Part VI: Internet:.
.:Part VII: The Artists:.
.:Part VIII: The Birth of the Renaissance:.Stay Tuned for Part VI: The Internet
Tags: The Electronic Renaissance Part V: The Tools Article
The following article is part of an eight part series exploring my thoughts on the state of electronic music in the current decade compared to the 1990's and 1980's.
--------------------------------------------------------------The sound and style of electronic music has changed over the past twenty years, and if you listen to tracks from the eighties to the nineties through to the current day there is a definite trend in the sonic character and form of most of the music. Most of the electronic music through the past two decades up to the late nineteen nineties was recorded on hardware through "traditional" recording practices. While the computer was ever present during all of this time it was not really until the turn of the century that computers could really handle complex audio mathematical computations in real-time. Instrument developers stepped up to the plate in this recent period and introduced new forms of synthesis and sound design that could never have been previously been available under traditional hardware forms. As with all tools there develops methods and idiosyncrasies in which people work with those tools. Music from the previous generation of electronic artists often times had a repetitive nature in which loops and patterns cycled and were built upon. The common and often times cliche sound of the spoken movie dialogue over a kick beat and squelching acid line, as portrayed rather humorously in this.:Strongbad Flash Comic:. , represents the stigma of much of the music from this era. These limitations of idiosyncrasies by their nature along with the recording mediums of the time created a certain sound and style. Despite this however, this music did find itself a mass audience and as I stated before it fit nicely into rock station playlists at the time when alternative rock was building in its own music subculture.
The new audio tools of the computer and music software are no different then the ones of the past, except for the fact that they have different idiosyncrasies and workflows. Let's not delude ourselves to think that the removal of past limitations or new sound design opportunities will somehow break us of habits or patterns. Even these new opportunities, if more open, present their own limitations as any tool would. While through the past decade there was a divergence of sounds forming new genres and styles, it could arguably be said that the new music of this century is featuring a convergence of sound. One of the common themes running in much of the current electronic music is the focus on big glossy, highly polished sounds. The highly polished track with epic synthlines, epic drum rolls, huge kicks, dynamic basslines, and ripping synths as emerged not only as a staple of the club scene, but has also emerged as judge point for electronic music on the listening level as well. Listen to a track produced today and one produced from the early nineties and the one produced from the nineties will often times sound thinner, but perhaps have more open feel. The currently produced tracks are mixed and mastered with sounds to appear up front in the mix, with little dynamic variation and little audio headroom not utilized. Criticisms of "Hot", "in your face" music are often heard by many audiophiles who listen to the highly tweaked and mastered tracks of current songs which strive to barrage you for your sense of attention. The problem here is mostly not in the fact of music being mixed this way, but for the fact that all music is being mixed this way. This form of mixing and mastering has become the industry and even independent standard of what is a "good song". I believe it is dangerous for a music scene when the standard of creative or good sets a single point of definition determining how tracks are to be judged. The biggest allure of vinyl and analog recording is the presence of space, warmth and irregularities.
Other Chapters in this writing:
.:Part I:The Decade That Should Have Been:.
.:Part II:Where Electronic Music Was:.
.:Part III:Who is to Blame?:.
.:Part IV: The Sound:.
.:Part V: The Tools:.
.:Part VI: Internet:.
.:Part VII: The Artists:.
.:Part VIII: The Birth of the Renaissance:.Stay Tuned for Part V: The Tools
Tags: The Electronic Renaissance Part IV: The Sound Article
--------------------------------------------------------------The sound and style of electronic music has changed over the past twenty years, and if you listen to tracks from the eighties to the nineties through to the current day there is a definite trend in the sonic character and form of most of the music. Most of the electronic music through the past two decades up to the late nineteen nineties was recorded on hardware through "traditional" recording practices. While the computer was ever present during all of this time it was not really until the turn of the century that computers could really handle complex audio mathematical computations in real-time. Instrument developers stepped up to the plate in this recent period and introduced new forms of synthesis and sound design that could never have been previously been available under traditional hardware forms. As with all tools there develops methods and idiosyncrasies in which people work with those tools. Music from the previous generation of electronic artists often times had a repetitive nature in which loops and patterns cycled and were built upon. The common and often times cliche sound of the spoken movie dialogue over a kick beat and squelching acid line, as portrayed rather humorously in this.:Strongbad Flash Comic:. , represents the stigma of much of the music from this era. These limitations of idiosyncrasies by their nature along with the recording mediums of the time created a certain sound and style. Despite this however, this music did find itself a mass audience and as I stated before it fit nicely into rock station playlists at the time when alternative rock was building in its own music subculture.
The new audio tools of the computer and music software are no different then the ones of the past, except for the fact that they have different idiosyncrasies and workflows. Let's not delude ourselves to think that the removal of past limitations or new sound design opportunities will somehow break us of habits or patterns. Even these new opportunities, if more open, present their own limitations as any tool would. While through the past decade there was a divergence of sounds forming new genres and styles, it could arguably be said that the new music of this century is featuring a convergence of sound. One of the common themes running in much of the current electronic music is the focus on big glossy, highly polished sounds. The highly polished track with epic synthlines, epic drum rolls, huge kicks, dynamic basslines, and ripping synths as emerged not only as a staple of the club scene, but has also emerged as judge point for electronic music on the listening level as well. Listen to a track produced today and one produced from the early nineties and the one produced from the nineties will often times sound thinner, but perhaps have more open feel. The currently produced tracks are mixed and mastered with sounds to appear up front in the mix, with little dynamic variation and little audio headroom not utilized. Criticisms of "Hot", "in your face" music are often heard by many audiophiles who listen to the highly tweaked and mastered tracks of current songs which strive to barrage you for your sense of attention. The problem here is mostly not in the fact of music being mixed this way, but for the fact that all music is being mixed this way. This form of mixing and mastering has become the industry and even independent standard of what is a "good song". I believe it is dangerous for a music scene when the standard of creative or good sets a single point of definition determining how tracks are to be judged. The biggest allure of vinyl and analog recording is the presence of space, warmth and irregularities.
Other Chapters in this writing:
.:Part I:The Decade That Should Have Been:.
.:Part II:Where Electronic Music Was:.
.:Part III:Who is to Blame?:.
.:Part IV: The Sound:.
.:Part V: The Tools:.
.:Part VI: Internet:.
.:Part VII: The Artists:.
.:Part VIII: The Birth of the Renaissance:.Stay Tuned for Part V: The Tools
Tags: The Electronic Renaissance Part IV: The Sound Article