R/E/P Community

R/E/P => R/E/P Archives => j. hall => Topic started by: j.hall on February 13, 2006, 02:09:53 pm

Title: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on February 13, 2006, 02:09:53 pm
i'll have the drums ready in about a week.

what is the tuning?
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: starscream2010 on February 13, 2006, 02:22:27 pm
D minor?
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: craig boychuk on February 13, 2006, 03:25:26 pm
How about:

G# D# A# D# G C


Nice an' low...heh...



-craig
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: Fibes on February 13, 2006, 05:40:50 pm
craig wrote on Mon, 13 February 2006 15:25

How about:

G# D# A# D# G C


Nice an' low...heh...



-craig


Not for my baritone.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: scottoliphant on February 13, 2006, 06:04:19 pm
can we put piano on it?
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on February 13, 2006, 06:32:21 pm
yes
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: scottoliphant on February 13, 2006, 06:40:35 pm
cowbell? if i tune it to G# D# A# D# G C ?
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: floodstage on February 13, 2006, 07:07:41 pm
Are all the guitars used on the track to be tuned to whatever key we use?

(I don't have a problem with this, just checking!)

I'd prefer a non major tuning.  
Doesn't have to be minor though.
Could be minor 7 or Rb augmented or
a suspended 4 tuning. or..
 
(Of course w/ sus4, half the songs would probably sound like Pinball Wizard)
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: Bivouac on February 13, 2006, 10:29:38 pm
All I ask for is nothing too far from a full step down (especially on the low E).  I'd just have horrible intonation problems otherwise...

I'm game for anything though!  Challenge ME!!!

Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: craig boychuk on February 14, 2006, 10:58:35 am
Fibes wrote on Mon, 13 February 2006 16:40


...Not for my baritone.





Aww yea!
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on February 14, 2006, 12:22:25 pm
i'm with floodstage, minor tuning

hurry up and decide people.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: NelsonL on February 14, 2006, 12:26:41 pm
So many of my buddies are having their first child lately...

DADFAD
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: John Ivan on February 14, 2006, 01:33:53 pm
scottoliphant wrote on Mon, 13 February 2006 18:40

cowbell? if i tune it to G# D# A# D# G C ?



Well, that's CRAZY~!! It would interesting though. It's an E flat Major with an A flat on the Bass. It's almost the biggest voicing you can play on a guitar as far as spreading the tones out.

Cool
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: NelsonL on February 14, 2006, 01:39:42 pm
ivan40 wrote on Tue, 14 February 2006 10:33

scottoliphant wrote on Mon, 13 February 2006 18:40

cowbell? if i tune it to G# D# A# D# G C ?



Well, that's CRAZY~!! It would interesting though. It's an E flat Major with an A flat on the Bass. It's almost the biggest voicing you can play on a guitar as far as spreading the tones out.

Cool


I think my strings will get stuck on the pole pieces if I tune that low.

Durn magnets.

Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: John Ivan on February 14, 2006, 01:43:37 pm
we could do a minor add 9 tuning in E??

E-B-F#-G-D-E. We could tune the high E string up to A but we would need very light strings for this. It's an easy tuning to mess with.

It makes no difference to me what the tuning is as long as It wont break my Git er""

Ivan........................................
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on February 14, 2006, 03:10:29 pm
that's why they put screws on the pick ups.....you can actually raise and lower your pick up.........................................
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: Frob on February 14, 2006, 04:39:35 pm
unless youve got an old danelctro baritone.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: garret on February 16, 2006, 10:11:07 am
ivan40 wrote on Tue, 14 February 2006 13:43


It makes no difference to me what the tuning is as long as It wont break my Git er""



If it's too nutty, I'm just gonna use my two-year-old's toy guitar.  The $20 nylon string one that looks like it was put together by summer camp kids.  The one with the lifted bridge, and scratches from being dragged around the house...   it has the worst intonation I've ever heard, but if you're careful, you can get a cool ukelele sound out of it. Heh.  Oxymoron, I know.  

It's funny to me that no one has questioned what an alternate tuning means if you don't use any guitars....  indie rock w/o guitars?!  heresy.

Twisted Evil -

-Garret
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: scottoliphant on February 16, 2006, 04:36:00 pm
I asked about piano =)
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: craig boychuk on February 16, 2006, 04:48:54 pm
ivan40 wrote on Tue, 14 February 2006 12:33

scottoliphant wrote on Mon, 13 February 2006 18:40

cowbell? if i tune it to G# D# A# D# G C ?



Well, that's CRAZY~!! It would interesting though. It's an E flat Major with an A flat on the Bass. It's almost the biggest voicing you can play on a guitar as far as spreading the tones out.

Cool


Yeah, it's pretty wicked. One of my current favs.

It does require some hefty strings, but I usually have 12s on there anyway, so it doesn't really mess with my instrument.

Ahhh, 12s. Is there anything they can't do?

Wait, don't answer that.


-craig
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: craig boychuk on February 16, 2006, 04:51:13 pm
scottoliphant wrote on Thu, 16 February 2006 15:36

I asked about piano =)


It'll take a little longer to tune that than a guitar, but I'll be it'd be cool. heh...

Hey, is prepared piano "indie rock"? Hmmm...
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: scottoliphant on February 16, 2006, 04:56:53 pm
i tried for about half an hour to tune my piano once, then gave up and hired it out... luckily because all the notes are there, instead of tuning it, i just have to learn how to play some weird chords
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: NelsonL on February 16, 2006, 04:59:41 pm
We have a Metal band in this week that tunes to drop C. Whenever I pick up one of their guitars it just feels wrong to me.

Sounds pretty heavy though.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: Frob on February 16, 2006, 05:13:18 pm
we play with a guy from a heaver band somtimes. some times he will tart to do some funky things and i sit there and watch to find out how he does that cord with one finger, then i remember that he uses some odd tuning.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: starscream2010 on February 16, 2006, 05:26:22 pm
rattleyour wrote on Thu, 16 February 2006 15:59

We have a Metal band in this week that tunes to drop C. Whenever I pick up one of their guitars it just feels wrong to me.

Sounds pretty heavy though.




We tried tuning in drop C, but could never get comfortable with it, you almost have to use mix-matched strings and even then the intonation is all screwy, so now we play in drop C#
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: scottoliphant on February 16, 2006, 05:44:18 pm
how about we all tune UP! to G! maybe it'll convince me to build out the "treble car" I've always wanted to combat all the bass cars running around my neighborhood (which are awesome when you are in a session by the way). just horrible earsplitting hi end, nothing below 5 k. umm i'm off topic.



Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: scott volthause on February 21, 2006, 01:19:01 pm
I tune drop C too.

As for the tuning of IMP, I don't care.

I just want to get started.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discussion.
Post by: floodstage on February 21, 2006, 01:53:19 pm
scott volthause wrote on Tue, 21 February 2006 13:19


I just want to get started.



What he said!!!




To offer a suggestion to get this thing moving.......

J, would you pick a tuning please?  

I prefer a minor or minor 7 but I don't really care.  An executive decision is needed.  
(You don't really expect the mob to come to consensus do you?!)

Once you set the tuning, I suggest the following to remove excuses for people who string their guitars looser than a drunken whore at Mardi Gras, or tighter than my first girlfriend.

Why don't we:

Use whatever tuning J says to use, BUT, if the suggested tuning is too loose or tight for your truss rod/attitude/happiness in general, then allow the players to tighten up (or loosen) ALL the strings a 1/2 step or whatever is necessary for the guitar to stay happy and still keep the relationships between strings the same.

This will keep the common ground of a set tuning and fingering patterns, and, placate those who have their axes set up in drop D, C, Bb, tenor, banjo, etc, as well..  

The open chord may be a 1/2 step or two up or down, but I may capo whatever we use to fit a vocal key anyway so who gives a flying ***k!

Let get this puppy barkin!
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discussion.
Post by: Bivouac on February 21, 2006, 03:24:03 pm
floodstage wrote on Tue, 21 February 2006 11:53



J, would you pick a tuning please?  




Agreed w/everything floodstage said...

...Can't wait--let's have some drums!
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discussion.
Post by: NelsonL on February 21, 2006, 03:35:32 pm
"We must tune to the ancient chord of indecision. Unfortunately, the intervals were never recorded in the written record due to ambiguity."

http://www.entopia2002.com/screenshots/dvd/aquaTeen_vol1_moonites.jpg
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discussion.
Post by: j.hall on February 21, 2006, 05:12:44 pm
G# D# A# D# G C

i will try to get the drums delt with this weekend.  if i can't pull it off, i'll send the DVD to Liam (yes i just volunteered you) and give him my FTP login.

i'm sorry i'm not right on top of this one guys.....i'm just one guy under a mountain of work at the moment.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discussion.
Post by: floodstage on February 21, 2006, 06:01:32 pm
j.hall wrote on Tue, 21 February 2006 17:12

G# D# A# D# G C



I don't like that one.

Can we try another tuning please?
















Just kidding!

Thanks for making our minds up for us!

Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: scott volthause on February 21, 2006, 06:05:15 pm
our choice of octave, right?
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: floodstage on February 21, 2006, 06:06:55 pm
BTW,
Is that low to high?  (like E-A-D-G-B-E)
or is it high to low? (like E-B-G-D-A-E)
Looks like high to low to me.  (or left handed)

If I invert it, it would be C G D# A# D# G# which makes more sense to me without actually stretching strings to find out.

Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discussion.
Post by: NelsonL on February 21, 2006, 06:09:55 pm
j.hall wrote on Tue, 21 February 2006 14:12

G# D# A# D# G C

i will try to get the drums delt with this weekend.  if i can't pull it off, i'll send the DVD to Liam (yes i just volunteered you) and give him my FTP login.

i'm sorry i'm not right on top of this one guys.....i'm just one guy under a mountain of work at the moment.


What makes you so sure I have internet access?








Oh... right.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discussion.
Post by: Bivouac on February 21, 2006, 06:33:05 pm
j.hall wrote on Tue, 21 February 2006 15:12

G# D# A# D# G C




Je ne comprende pas...Sad

Excuse my lack of musical knowledge here, but does this mean:

e--> down four steps --> C
b--> down four steps --> G
g--> up five steps   --> D#
d--> up five steps   --> A#
a--> up six steps    --> D#
E--> up four steps   --> G#

So...um...I'm just completely lost.  There's no way that's what you meant...

It has four sharps, so just in the key of E?  I have no idea...
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: marcel on February 22, 2006, 01:34:00 am
scott volthause wrote on Tue, 21 February 2006 15:05

our choice of octave, right?


So, Bivouac, I may be wrong, but (low to hi) D#, G#, C, G, A#, D# would work.
There could be many others...
Someone please correct me if this is wrong...

Best, Marcel
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discussion.
Post by: max cooper on February 22, 2006, 09:15:40 am
j.hall wrote on Tue, 21 February 2006 16:12

G# D# A# D# G C

i will try to get the drums delt with this weekend.  if i can't pull it off, i'll send the DVD to Liam (yes i just volunteered you) and give him my FTP login.

i'm sorry i'm not right on top of this one guys.....i'm just one guy under a mountain of work at the moment.


Excellent!

*tunes guitar*

Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discussion.
Post by: j.hall on February 22, 2006, 09:42:48 am
i assumed that tuning was written in standard format, high E to low E.

volthause will have to clarify as it was his tuning.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: scott volthause on February 22, 2006, 11:33:32 am
wasn't me. i think there was a mis-quote somewhere.

edit

here's the first suggestion of that tuning from craig.

craig wrote on Mon, 13 February 2006 15:25

How about:

G# D# A# D# G C


Nice an' low...heh...



-craig
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: Bivouac on February 22, 2006, 02:26:08 pm
Ok, there's just no way you can do that tuning on a normal scale guitar...

Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: NelsonL on February 22, 2006, 02:30:52 pm
You just have to lower your pickups... to the southern hemisphere.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: starscream2010 on February 22, 2006, 02:37:25 pm
I took it to mean...

e--> up 2 steps --> G#
b--> up 2 steps --> D#
g--> up 1 & 1/2 steps --> A#
d--> up 1 step --> D#
a--> down 1 step --> G
E--> down 2 steps --> C


Is this incorrect?
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on February 22, 2006, 04:40:26 pm
stop being a bunch of cry babies.  we already agreed that if you can't hang, you can dial it up a step.  that will get you D on your low E string.

don't you guys listen to kyuss?

that's A

Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: pg666 on February 22, 2006, 04:45:36 pm
7 string kits are great for this stuff without having to adjust yer geetar... and you know you're gonna need that extra high E at some point

edit: how did i miss the mooninites until now??
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: starscream2010 on February 22, 2006, 04:46:14 pm
I'm down... I just want to make sure that I'm tuning the thing the 'right way'... so should the last 4 strings (D,G,B & e) be tuned down as opposed to up?
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: NelsonL on February 22, 2006, 04:51:12 pm
j.hall wrote on Wed, 22 February 2006 13:40

stop being a bunch of cry babies.  we already agreed that if you can't hang, you can dial it up a step.  that will get you D on your low E string.

don't you guys listen to kyuss?

that's A




I rarely take time out from listening to my pan flute box set.

Oh wait... are they that one band that sounds all muddy and stuff?
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: NelsonL on February 22, 2006, 04:55:01 pm
pg666 wrote on Wed, 22 February 2006 13:45

7 string kits are great for this stuff without having to adjust yer geetar... and you know you're gonna need that extra high E at some point

edit: how did i miss the mooninites until now??


"Cuz you're an inferior being, earth man."

http://www.dadsbigplan.com/images/mooninite.jpg
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: Bivouac on February 22, 2006, 04:58:11 pm
starscream2010 wrote on Wed, 22 February 2006 14:46

I'm down... I just want to make sure that I'm tuning the thing the 'right way'... so should the last 4 strings (D,G,B & e) be tuned down as opposed to up?


I'm down too, just wanted to make sure I understood correctly...I guess I'm going to have to find me some big johnson strings though...
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: starscream2010 on February 22, 2006, 05:02:44 pm
Bivouac wrote on Wed, 22 February 2006 15:58

 
I guess I'm going to have to find me some big johnson strings though...



No doubt... I dunno, if 10-.52 will be heavy of enough...
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on February 22, 2006, 05:40:30 pm
where is craig?

Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: scott volthause on February 22, 2006, 06:30:43 pm
starscream2010 wrote on Wed, 22 February 2006 17:02

Bivouac wrote on Wed, 22 February 2006 15:58

 
I guess I'm going to have to find me some big johnson strings though...



No doubt... I dunno, if 10-.52 will be heavy of enough...


depends on how hard you play.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discussion.
Post by: floodstage on February 22, 2006, 06:47:13 pm
j.hall wrote on Wed, 22 February 2006 16:40

stop being a bunch of cry babies.  We already agreed that if you can't hang, you can dial it up a step.  that will get you D on your low E string.


Before I bitch, I'll quote one of my old bosses favorites:


"You want sympathy?  Look it up.  
It's in the dictionary between shit and syphilis!"




That said, here's my bucket 'o' bitches:

1) Tuning the Low string up to a D (a full step up from the suggested tuning) would mean taking the high B & E up 6 half steps to keep the intervals the same.  That's pretty darn tight!  I didn't think about a tuning that couldn't really be moved.

2) All my guitars are set up with 9's or 10's.  I'd have to cut a new nut to string up w/12's and I'm too lazy for that.

3) This tuning does not sound like a chord to me when played open which means it won't lend itself easily to slide.  My idea of an open tuning is something that facilitates slide.  This tuning's main purpose (from the few minutes I spent with it last night) is to make playing the guitar harder!

Yes I know, .....  that's the whole point, try something new!

I'll do it.


bitch bitch whine moan......friggin fraggin rashum frashum ......




Hmmmm ... What if I pull a Keith Richards and throw the low string in the trash and just string up the top 5?  I could get those 5 to work a step lower than suggested.  (Or not play the bottom string and not tell anyone I didn't tune it down to B).  Hmmmm.....

or....

Is it okay if I use a lighter string than normal for the low string and take it up instead of down.

hmmm........













If I see Craig, I'm gonna get him real drunk and put his sorry arse on a plane to a 3rd world country where there is no alcohol and where they are REAL intolerant of free thinking musician types for suggesting this tuning!
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: garret on February 22, 2006, 09:13:52 pm
Hmm... after fiddling with it for a bit, I'm wondering if the first three notes should (or could) be switched.... maybe craig remembered it wrong?  Or maybe he's just sadistic.  

(high to low)

G# D# A# D# G C

becomes...

D# A# G# D# G C

... which is easy to set up, without changing any strings. Working from the bottom up, which is how my brain works and how I usually tune up...

E drops down two steps to C
A drops down one step to G
D goes up a half step to D#
G goes up a half step to G#
B goes down a half step to A#
E goes down a half step to D#

I strummed around in this for a bit, and I think I could work with it.

-Garret
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on February 23, 2006, 01:11:07 pm
ok, FINE!!!!!!!!!!!

we're changing it.

i'm not a trained guitar player.

ya'll need to help me with the tuning thing.  if it ain't drop D or DADGAD i'm lost.

HURRY UP and get some some ideas.  don't give me "minor 7th tunings are cool"

just post the six notes you want

i personally couldn't care less what the tuning is, as long as my high e doesn't snap and poke my eye out, i'll be cool.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: NelsonL on February 23, 2006, 01:18:20 pm
j.hall wrote on Thu, 23 February 2006 10:11

 
"minor 7th tunings are cool"



Simple...

EGDGBD

Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: garret on February 23, 2006, 02:05:14 pm
j.hall wrote on Thu, 23 February 2006 13:11


just post the six notes you want



D# A# G# D# G C

We can't change now, I already got my tune half written.   Oh, and make sure your drums fit what I wrote.

Major 7th tunings are boss.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: craig boychuk on February 23, 2006, 03:23:49 pm
j.hall wrote on Wed, 22 February 2006 16:40

where is craig?





Oh fuck, I missed two whole pages of discussion here. Sorry folks, I've been holed up in the studio.


I meant it to be low to high. So yes, the low E string would be tuned waaaaay down there to a G#.

To clarify:

low_________high

E--A--D--G--B--E - standard

G#-D#-A#-D#-G--C - fancy




It is quite low.

It is not impossible.

It will be easier with heavy strings.

I'm using this tuning with 11's or 12's right now, depending on the guitar. Works fine.



-craig






Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: scott volthause on February 23, 2006, 03:27:24 pm
awesome.

it's a lock.

BRING ON ZE DRUMS!
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on February 23, 2006, 06:01:41 pm
i'm waiting for more people to chime in.  there is little point going with craig's tuning if every one is going to hate it!
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: MorningStar on February 23, 2006, 06:31:03 pm
j.hall wrote on Thu, 23 February 2006 18:01

i'm waiting for more people to chime in.  there is little point going with craig's tuning if every one is going to hate it!



heres a vote against it. I've got 12s on a Les Paul. Its sloppy and doesnt feel good. If we must use this at least let us transpose it up if we want.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: garret on February 23, 2006, 06:46:04 pm
Before chucking craig's tuning, how about folks try my variation... it's the same notes, just rearranged a bit.  And it's a piece of cake to set up.

Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: craig boychuk on February 24, 2006, 02:35:17 am
MorningStar wrote on Thu, 23 February 2006 17:31

j.hall wrote on Thu, 23 February 2006 18:01

i'm waiting for more people to chime in.  there is little point going with craig's tuning if every one is going to hate it!



heres a vote against it. I've got 12s on a Les Paul. Its sloppy and doesnt feel good. If we must use this at least let us transpose it up if we want.


Yeah, it's not gonna the greatest on a les paul. I forgot about shorter scale lengths. boo.

Why don't we allow transposing? We'll still be confined to specific intervals, so the exercise won't really loose any substance or validity or whatever.

But hey, if most people don't like it, that's cool with me. It was just a suggestion. I enjoy pretty much anything that's not standard tuning, so this whole deal is a treat for me.



-craig
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: starscream2010 on February 24, 2006, 10:11:04 am
So what's the tuning going to be?
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on February 24, 2006, 10:45:02 am
D# A# G# D# G C

that's high e to low E
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: craig boychuk on February 24, 2006, 02:35:27 pm
Excellent.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: scott volthause on February 24, 2006, 03:06:46 pm
craig wrote on Fri, 24 February 2006 14:35

Excellent.


X2
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: max cooper on February 25, 2006, 09:05:30 am
j.hall wrote on Wed, 22 February 2006 15:40

stop being a bunch of cry babies.  we already agreed that if you can't hang, you can dial it up a step.  that will get you D on your low E string.

don't you guys listen to kyuss?

that's A




One night I was at a Kyuss gig at the Whiskey and they were tuning by ear (stage volume, natch!) and it was pretty funny 'cause they got to the lowest string and they weren't anywhere near in tune but as soon as it was within a whole step, they launched into the first song.

Those of us who use .013's will probably have an easier time with the prescribed tuning.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: floodstage on February 26, 2006, 05:12:53 pm
j.hall wrote on Fri, 24 February 2006 10:45

D# A# G# D# G C

that's low E to high e


(Sorry I'm late, been out of town)

Here we go again.  Are you sure that isn't high to low?  
(and I mean in pitch, not in relation to the floor)

(I had a friend who calls the high (pitch) E,  the Low E, because it's closest to the floor (thus low) and it took FOREVER for us to  figure out why we couldn't communicate)

Using the D# A# G# D# G C tuning assuming D# is lowest pitch string, the strings that are normally D & G strings will be stretched super tight (6 or more 1/2 steps).

Reversing that layout would put the D & G strings within one 1/2 step of standard tuning.

Please clarify once again.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: John Ivan on February 26, 2006, 05:34:06 pm
Hi all. I guess J has chosen the tuning? cool with me. I plan on setting up a giter' just for this purpose. I'll get my 79 Hamer out!! It sounds pretty cool. It needs some love but it's playable..

Sorry I'm sorta late.. I'm still in. Should be fun.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: garret on February 26, 2006, 08:29:27 pm
floodstage wrote on Sun, 26 February 2006 17:12


Using the D# A# G# D# G C tuning assuming D# is lowest pitch string, the strings that are normally D & G strings will be stretched super tight (6 or more 1/2 steps).

Reversing that layout would put the D & G strings within one 1/2 step of standard tuning.

Please clarify once again.


I wasn't gonna ask, but I'm glad you did. Smile

I believe I proposed the altered tuning that J chose... but he had it backwards from how I'm using it.

From low pitch to high pitch, C G D# G# A# D#

E drops down two steps to C
A drops down one step to G
D goes up a half step to D#
G goes up a half step to G#
B goes down a half step to A#
E goes down a half step to D#

-Garret
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: max cooper on February 26, 2006, 08:29:50 pm
You think the drums'll be in 4/4?

Anything's cool with me, but just wondering.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: max cooper on February 26, 2006, 08:31:56 pm
floodstage wrote on Sun, 26 February 2006 16:12



Using the D# A# G# D# G C tuning assuming D# is lowest pitch string, the strings that are normally D & G strings will be stretched super tight (6 or more 1/2 steps).

Reversing that layout would put the D & G strings within one 1/2 step of standard tuning.

Please clarify once again.


Now you've got me wondering.

Is the fattest string the D# or the C ?  Not to beat this dead horse anymore, but that's a lot of stretching from D to G#. Very Happy
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: floodstage on February 26, 2006, 09:13:31 pm
garretg wrote on Sun, 26 February 2006 20:29

I believe I proposed the altered tuning that J chose... but he had it backwards from how I'm using it.

From low pitch to high pitch, C G D# G# A# D#

E drops down two steps to C
A drops down one step to G
D goes up a half step to D#
G goes up a half step to G#
B goes down a half step to A#
E goes down a half step to D#

-Garret

This makes sense.  
Tried the tuning out.  
Not my favorite, but I can make it work.
Let's get some drums!


Bitching over (for me)
Let's rock!
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: floodstage on February 26, 2006, 09:17:27 pm
max cooper wrote on Sun, 26 February 2006 20:29

You think the drums'll be in 4/4?

Anything's cool with me, but just wondering.

From my read on the rules, you can edit the drums all you want, so if you want them in 4, or 7, or 13, you can make them that way no matter what they are originally.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: garret on February 26, 2006, 09:20:43 pm
floodstage wrote on Sun, 26 February 2006 21:13


Tried the tuning out.  
Not my favorite, but I can make it work.
Let's get some drums!
Let's rock!


Yah, I'm not used to completely nutty tunings like this one (usually I just play standard or simple drop tunings), so I'm playing by ear even more than usual.  But I found this tuning does some nifty things for simple shapes, and the drones are useful.  The C on the bottom is cool, makes everything I play (on acoustic) sound like the band Morphine for some reason.  Dark and bluesy.

Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: TheViking on February 26, 2006, 09:22:20 pm
The drums are in 4/4 if I remember correctly.   The arrangement isn't very conventional but as said earlier, you may edit, replace and detect at will if needed.   The drums were cut to a click but are not quantized or beat detectived.

J or Liam should have them up soon.

Oh, and try to include the tempo and/or recorded click track as they should map out well on any DAW grid already.   Thanks!
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: max cooper on February 27, 2006, 10:32:26 am
garretg wrote on Sun, 26 February 2006 20:20

floodstage wrote on Sun, 26 February 2006 21:13


Tried the tuning out.  
Not my favorite, but I can make it work.
Let's get some drums!
Let's rock!


Yah, I'm not used to completely nutty tunings like this one (usually I just play standard or simple drop tunings), so I'm playing by ear even more than usual.  But I found this tuning does some nifty things for simple shapes, and the drones are useful.  The C on the bottom is cool, makes everything I play (on acoustic) sound like the band Morphine for some reason.  Dark and bluesy.




I started with non-standard tunings because whenever I'd sit down to write a song, I'd end up having to spend a couple of hours bashing out the entire Stones library or the Ramones library or whatever.  Better for me to work in a tuning where I don't know any songs or patterns or anything at all.

So C is on the bottom after all, right?
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on February 27, 2006, 03:56:38 pm
i've corrected my post containing the tuning.

"high e to low E"
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: scottoliphant on February 28, 2006, 06:51:15 pm
should we check here for posts about the drums or the other thread?  
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on March 01, 2006, 02:07:33 pm
keep checking here.

aside from me being lazy, PSW is sorting out some bandwidth issues and has pulled down my FTP server for a bit.  it's reported to be back online shortly.

stand by, i'll get it done very soon.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: max cooper on March 01, 2006, 08:05:11 pm
j.hall wrote on Wed, 01 March 2006 13:07

keep checking here.

aside from me being lazy, PSW is sorting out some bandwidth issues and has pulled down my FTP server for a bit.  it's reported to be back online shortly.

stand by, i'll get it done very soon.


No worries; just didn't want to get behind the eight ball.

Thanks for the clarification on the tuning.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: chris haines on March 03, 2006, 04:35:22 am
max cooper wrote on Sat, 25 February 2006 15:05

j.hall wrote on Wed, 22 February 2006 15:40

stop being a bunch of cry babies.  we already agreed that if you can't hang, you can dial it up a step.  that will get you D on your low E string.

don't you guys listen to kyuss?

that's A




One night I was at a Kyuss gig at the Whiskey and they were tuning by ear (stage volume, natch!) and it was pretty funny 'cause they got to the lowest string and they weren't anywhere near in tune but as soon as it was within a whole step, they launched into the first song.

Those of us who use .013's will probably have an easier time with the prescribed tuning.



That's awesome.  I had a band based out of Palm Desert, CA for a few years and Unida rehearsed down the hall from us (John Garcia from Kyuss on vox) and they were loud as fvck & low & heavy but in tune & rockin'...we were recording at Monkey at about the same time Queens was in there and they were loud as fvck and low & heavy and in tune as well, so I think everyone sorted out the tuning issue...

It took me a long time to find non-wound Gstrings (26) for my 13s...had to buy 'em in bulk from juststrings.com which was out of stock for months...never found them in a normal set of strings, where do you guys get 'em?

Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: Fabricoh35 on March 03, 2006, 11:16:37 am
Okay, I'm a music therory moron.  I've tried many times to learn it but lets be honest therory is not a lot of fun.  I also don't get to use it so I lose what I have learned pretty quick.

So then, with this tuning or any other alternate tunings what do you usually do with the bass?  Do you keep it standard since most don't use bass chords in their songs?

Also any suggestions on ways to find workable fingering for chords and such in these types of tunings?  Is it basically just finding the notes that make up a given chord and then seeing if the fingering will work?

Am I just really overthinking some of this?
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: chris haines on March 03, 2006, 12:22:56 pm
this, as with all other satanic tunings, requires only that you play the bottom two strings on the same fret at the same time...which allows you to keep two different kinds of slides on at all times for the top three strings...i'm going to take the 'd' string off.



i usually tune flat, my bass player always tunes standard...this is counter-intuitive for me 'cause I find that geetar is based around open strings, so if I were the bass player I'd tune down as well, but it works for him.

Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: starscream2010 on March 03, 2006, 12:30:45 pm
Fabricoh35 wrote on Fri, 03 March 2006 10:16

Okay, I'm a music therory moron.  I've tried many times to learn it but lets be honest therory is not a lot of fun.  I also don't get to use it so I lose what I have learned pretty quick.

So then, with this tuning or any other alternate tunings what do you usually do with the bass?  Do you keep it standard since most don't use bass chords in their songs?

Also any suggestions on ways to find workable fingering for chords and such in these types of tunings?  Is it basically just finding the notes that make up a given chord and then seeing if the fingering will work?

Am I just really overthinking some of this?


My 'normal' tuning is drop-C# and our bass player tunes down as well... less confusion that way and it sounds darker.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: garret on March 03, 2006, 02:21:28 pm
Fabricoh35 wrote on Fri, 03 March 2006 11:16

Okay, I'm a music therory moron.  I've tried many times to learn it but lets be honest therory is not a lot of fun.  I also don't get to use it so I lose what I have learned pretty quick.



Heh. Here's my opinion... if you keep losing what you learn about music theory, maybe you don't need it.   I know quite a bit about music theory, mostly because I use it every day to analyze and improve what I write by ear.   I'm kind of wired for harmonic movement though.. all of my stuff is built around chord progressions, melodies and hooks.  So to me, there's nothing more exciting and fun than finding a new way to get from one musical place to another.

If you're a beatles fan, check out Alan Pollack's "Notes On" series.  It's helped me so much to learn the aspects of music theory that have stuck with me over the years... I discovered this site a few years back, and almost couldn't sleep at night I was so obsessed with it. Here were the masters secrets, out on full display, explained with a terrific balance of theory and plain spokenness.

http://www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/DATABASES/AWP/awp-notes_ on.html

Quote:


Also any suggestions on ways to find workable fingering for chords and such in these types of tunings?  Is it basically just finding the notes that make up a given chord and then seeing if the fingering will work?



With a completely nonstandard tuning like this one, I just play by ear to find fingering patterns that sound good, then I work backwards and figure out what chords they are.   To save time, here's a great site that lets you set up any tuning, click on fret locations, and identify likely names for the whatever you're playing.

http://www.gootar.com/guitar/

Quote:


Am I just really overthinking some of this?


Nah, if you're thinking about whether you need to learn some music theory, maybe you do.  It could be just what you need to take your music forward from wherever you're stuck today... (we're all stuck somewhere most of the time)

Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: floodstage on March 06, 2006, 09:34:08 pm
Please, oh most revered, respected, and highly exhalted President of this forum on the undefineable music known as Indie Rock,......

May we please have some drums!



Even if it's just a mp3 of the drum mix

I just want something to write to.







(That way I can start procratinating now!)
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on March 07, 2006, 12:31:53 am
sorry guys, i'm back to back infour full length records

if i were a rabbit farmer, i'd be up to my ass in rabbits.

i'll make sure the drums get done in the next two nights, or shipped out to liam

either way, i'll be done by early next week.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on March 08, 2006, 11:40:19 pm
tracks are converted, and ready to upload some where.

my PSW FTP server is down for the moment for some bandwidth issues.

no idea when it will be up.

i'll check with a few friends to see it some one can host it
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: max cooper on March 09, 2006, 03:29:09 am
Fabricoh35 wrote on Fri, 03 March 2006 10:16

Okay, I'm a music therory moron.  I've tried many times to learn it but lets be honest therory is not a lot of fun.  I also don't get to use it so I lose what I have learned pretty quick.

So then, with this tuning or any other alternate tunings what do you usually do with the bass?  Do you keep it standard since most don't use bass chords in their songs?

Also any suggestions on ways to find workable fingering for chords and such in these types of tunings?  Is it basically just finding the notes that make up a given chord and then seeing if the fingering will work?

Am I just really overthinking some of this?


I make up new tunings all the time just to keep things interesting.

Forget all the theory for a while and just muddle around until it sounds good.

I always leave the bass standard.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: max cooper on March 09, 2006, 03:30:17 am
chris haines wrote on Fri, 03 March 2006 03:35

s fvck and low & heavy and in tune as well, so I think everyone sorted out the tuning issue...

It took me a long time to find non-wound Gstrings (26) for my 13s...had to buy 'em in bulk from juststrings.com which was out of stock for months...never found them in a normal set of strings, where do you guys get 'em?




I'm of the wound G brigade. Tried it once and never went back.

Nowadays I can crush telephone receivers with my hands.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: floodstage on March 09, 2006, 07:39:57 am
How much bandwidth do you need?
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: garret on March 09, 2006, 08:20:14 am
floodstage wrote on Thu, 09 March 2006 07:39

How much bandwidth do you need?


How bout we mirror the file(s) in a bunch of places to split up the load...

I can host one copy.... J, just PM me and we can work out the upload details.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on March 09, 2006, 09:53:09 am
16bit 44.1 drums.

the session is about 250 meg.  so i need the space and bandwidth to pump that to about 20 people.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: garret on March 09, 2006, 10:13:36 am
j.hall wrote on Thu, 09 March 2006 09:53

16bit 44.1 drums.

the session is about 250 meg.  so i need the space and bandwidth to pump that to about 20 people.


I'm sure I have somewhere I could host that for a few days... helps to be a sysadmin sometimes.

Or, if you can split it up into < 100MB chunks, you can host em for free at http://rapidshare.de/.

Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: chris haines on March 09, 2006, 10:32:50 am
max cooper wrote on Thu, 09 March 2006 09:30

chris haines wrote on Fri, 03 March 2006 03:35

s fvck and low & heavy and in tune as well, so I think everyone sorted out the tuning issue...

It took me a long time to find non-wound Gstrings (26) for my 13s...had to buy 'em in bulk from juststrings.com which was out of stock for months...never found them in a normal set of strings, where do you guys get 'em?




I'm of the wound G brigade. Tried it once and never went back.

Nowadays I can crush telephone receivers with my hands.



so you use staggered pickups?  you get a huge loss of volume and a dead string with non-staggered pickups and a wound G...
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: John Ivan on March 09, 2006, 02:58:50 pm
Hey all,,

I'm busy as hell too and when ever is great with me. I know we want to get rolling but, No pressure J. Right?

It'll be fun.  I might cut the drums up to all hell but I might not too. It's so cool to use a crazy tuning also.Maybe I'll ad some percussion? is that OK?
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: floodstage on March 09, 2006, 05:33:26 pm
I've got about 7 gig's available this month and about 500 meg of storage so I can help if you need it.  PM me if you do.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: max cooper on March 12, 2006, 12:48:13 pm
chris haines wrote on Thu, 09 March 2006 09:32

max cooper wrote on Thu, 09 March 2006 09:30

chris haines wrote on Fri, 03 March 2006 03:35

s fvck and low & heavy and in tune as well, so I think everyone sorted out the tuning issue...

It took me a long time to find non-wound Gstrings (26) for my 13s...had to buy 'em in bulk from juststrings.com which was out of stock for months...never found them in a normal set of strings, where do you guys get 'em?




I'm of the wound G brigade. Tried it once and never went back.

Nowadays I can crush telephone receivers with my hands.



so you use staggered pickups?  you get a huge loss of volume and a dead string with non-staggered pickups and a wound G...


Huh.  I never thought about it.  I don't use staggered pickups, though, and I still think the G rings and resonates louder than anyone else on the dang geetar.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: John Ivan on March 12, 2006, 06:24:50 pm
FWIW, I finally found a PRS that I loved the sound of, the first one I owned I didn't end up liking. This one is SO even sounding! I'm now using the B-52's and really dig the sound I'm getting.

My strat? I have to milk evenness out of it by lowering the bottom end of all three pickups. It's a strange guitar that one. But nothing else sounds like it so.........

My 79 Hamer guitar has original Dimarzio pickups in it and they are micro phonic as hell but, you can hear the body and it sounds like it's out of control. It's a cool sound if you stay out of the room where the amp is, which I'm used to now anyhow..

Enough off topic crap,, sorry..

Ivan...................................................
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: scottoliphant on March 23, 2006, 12:52:36 am
we still doing this? was looking forward to it!
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: starscream2010 on March 23, 2006, 09:40:52 am
scottoliphant wrote on Wed, 22 March 2006 23:52

we still doing this? was looking forward to it!



Sounds like El Presidente might be drowning in mixes right now... hopefully we can do this soon.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on March 23, 2006, 05:42:22 pm
starscream2010 wrote on Thu, 23 March 2006 08:40



Sounds like El Presidente might be drowning in mixes right now... hopefully we can do this soon.


something like that.  it'll get going in the next 10 days, one way or another.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: Buzz on April 03, 2006, 12:45:44 pm
10 days J

LAter
Buzz

Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on April 03, 2006, 01:44:43 pm
OH CRAP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

i'll make the DVD tonight and send it off to flood.........

sorry guys, i'm just getting hammered here.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: John Ivan on April 03, 2006, 05:09:04 pm
j.hall wrote on Mon, 03 April 2006 12:44

OH CRAP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

i'll make the DVD tonight and send it off to flood.........

sorry guys, i'm just getting hammered here.



Yeah Yeah,, what ever, get off your lazy ass! Damn musicians! get a JOB

{I kid I kid} Shocked  Surprised

I'm busy as hell too. Funny, there doesn't seem to be the correct amount of money coming in for how busy I am Crying or Very Sad
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: floodstage on April 03, 2006, 08:14:31 pm
John Ivan wrote on Mon, 03 April 2006 16:09

 Funny, there doesn't seem to be the correct amount of money coming in for how busy I am Crying or Very Sad



You are preachin' to the choir my man!
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: Buzz on April 04, 2006, 03:14:09 pm
NOT pushin J just a friendly reminder !!!!  Razz

Later
Buzz


PS: could you post a rules thread , or a theme or tuning setup ??

Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on April 04, 2006, 03:39:19 pm
flood should have a disc in the next few days.

i'm sure he'll announce where to get the files once he uploads them.

there are no rules except for the tuning which has been posted by me earlier in this thread.

Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on April 04, 2006, 03:41:22 pm
D# A# G# D# G C

that's high e to low E
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on April 10, 2006, 10:17:09 am
from floodstage:

J,

The files are up!

I posted a hidden page on my web site with the files on them.

The link address is:

http://64.92.127.10/Hidden%20download%20page.html

I guess this means I'm no longer anonymous. D'uohhhh!!!!
(Should have thought of that before I offered to host the files!)

I have 10 gigs of bandwidth. If it gets used up, I'll have to take down the page, but the site should allow about 25 to 30 full sets of downloads in a month before that becomes a problem so we'll probably be okay.

My web site has had a problem on and off lately that I'm still waiting for tech support to clear up.

Sometimes the pages shows HTML code instead of what it is supposed to show.

All you have to do is hit refresh (F5 on a PC) and the problem clears up.

Take it easy!
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: garret on April 10, 2006, 11:32:49 am
And here's a mirror.   Basically unlimited bandwidth, so feel free to hammer it. Wink

I've zip and RAR compressed the whole set of wav files... use whichever you can decompress.  

http://128.174.155.155/temp/drumtracks.rar (160MB)
http://128.174.155.155/temp/drumtracks.zip  (208MB)

If you don't have a rar decompressor... try these:

PC/windows folks:
http://www.win-rar.com/download.html

Mac folks:
http://unrarx.sourceforge.net/

-Garret
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: John Ivan on April 10, 2006, 11:37:03 am
Hey, Thankfully, It's a good drum recording! Sounds great man. Nice work.

Ji............................................
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on April 10, 2006, 01:24:43 pm
i can email a PT session doc to anyone interested.

it will have the tempo map in it already.  other then that, it's not all that useful for anyone with average PT skills.

also, i have no time to actually participate in this.  so, to make myself feel better i'll offer a drum mix of the drums i have for anyone to use.

i'll get the drums pounding and print a stereo file

let me know if you want it and i'll knock it out this weekend.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: TheViking on April 10, 2006, 01:45:26 pm
John Ivan wrote on Mon, 10 April 2006 11:37

Hey, Thankfully, It's a good drum recording! Sounds great man. Nice work.

Ji............................................


Thank you...

Any critique on the sounds would be helpful.   Those drums were recorded for a project I was working on back in October and I honestly can't recall most of what I did without my notes.   Glad to hear they are working for you.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: John Ivan on April 10, 2006, 04:24:54 pm
TheViking wrote on Mon, 10 April 2006 12:45

John Ivan wrote on Mon, 10 April 2006 11:37

Hey, Thankfully, It's a good drum recording! Sounds great man. Nice work.

Ji............................................


Thank you...

Any critique on the sounds would be helpful.   Those drums were recorded for a project I was working on back in October and I honestly can't recall most of what I did without my notes.   Glad to hear they are working for you.




Yeah, I pulled 'em into SAM and did some quick panning, no EQ and just balanced. Nice and clean and the, "factory" track is Great. It might be all the Time based Effect I need, we'll see. Nice bro..

JI.....................................................


P.S.  Ouch~!@#$%^& Who can stand that click. That'll keep ya in line. Yikes! Surprised
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: TheViking on April 10, 2006, 06:22:56 pm
There is no way you can't hear that click.   It burns.

Feel the burn.   LOL.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: scottoliphant on April 10, 2006, 09:54:37 pm
nice job
care to share the signal chain / mics? What are the "RM" mics?
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: garret on April 10, 2006, 11:34:58 pm
Nice drums, good stuff to work with   Cool

Quick thing to save midi folks some time.  Seems the click is just straight 88 bpm.

-Garret
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: craig boychuk on April 11, 2006, 11:53:08 am
Say, is there any sort of deadline for completion of this thing?

Maybe I missed it in an earlier post...
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: TheViking on April 11, 2006, 12:03:56 pm
It's been a while but I will try to see what I can remember about those drum sounds.   I have a picture here we took from that session and from it, I can tell you that the mics used were the following...

Kick In - 57?
Kick Out - D112
Snr - 57
HH - AudioTechnica 3700
Rk - 421
Fl - 421
OH's - Earthworks SR-71's
Rm - Royer SF12?
Factory - Omni

The Ambiant Room mic is a Neumann TLM103 behind the drum set and to the drummers right.   That mic was more of a walk around the room until you find a sweet spot kind of thing.

The Kick In and Rm I can't tell from this picture so I'm guessing.

I have some pretty detailed notes at the studio.   I'll try to find them and get a more specific answer for you later today as far as what pres were used, etc.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: garret on April 11, 2006, 12:36:28 pm
TheViking wrote on Tue, 11 April 2006 12:03


Rk - 421



Alright, I'll ask.   What's the abbreviation RK for?

-G
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: scottoliphant on April 11, 2006, 12:38:11 pm
thanks for the info! I've never had the luxury to "AB" ribbons with condensors, very interesting, on preview, "RK" is rack i believe
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: TheViking on April 11, 2006, 05:13:00 pm
I found my notes...

176 was the click tempo so, 88 is half that.   Nice work.

The Kick In and Kick Out were both run through a Dan Alexander 1272 mic pre.   The Kick In also was run through a Pultec EQ.

Snr went through the Langevin AM16 mic pre as well as the HH and both Toms (Rk and Fl).

The OH went to the API's as well as the Ambiant Room mic.

The Royer stereo ribbon went through the Amek/Neve 9098 mic pre/EQ and then through a pair of Distressors but I think I ended up taking them out of the path for this song.

The Factory mic was a Behringer measurement microphone I had lying around.   It was the only omni I had at the time.   It was placed out the door and down the hall into the factory.   This mic went directly into the RCA BA-6B.

Hope this info is helpful.   Feel free to ask questions and give critique on the sounds.   There is always room for improvement.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: NelsonL on April 11, 2006, 06:57:26 pm
Great sounds Kevin-- seriously rockin.

Is this at your place?  

A/D?
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: scottoliphant on April 11, 2006, 11:20:44 pm
i especially like the kick outside mic (d112), nice balance of the low end and the click. did you end up using these for anything? would be interesting to see what you made of them when this is all said and done =)
thank you again for the time you all put into this, already been playing around and the tracks are a pleasure to work with

Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: floodstage on April 12, 2006, 07:40:07 am
craig wrote on Tue, 11 April 2006 10:53

Say, is there any sort of deadline for completion of this thing?

Maybe I missed it in an earlier post...


Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on April 12, 2006, 06:16:07 pm
since i'm not participating i sorta forgot about a deadline.

you guys tell me what you think.

end of may?
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: TheViking on April 12, 2006, 07:10:04 pm
rattleyour wrote on Tue, 11 April 2006 18:57

Great sounds Kevin-- seriously rockin.

Is this at your place?  

A/D?


Thank you.

Yes, these were tracked at Viking.   There is a picture from this session on our MySpace...

http://myspace-272.vo.llnwd.net/00340/27/20/340210272_l.jpg

It's a ProTools Mix Plus rig with 888/24 IO's.   I'm running OSX with ProTools v.6.4.1 software.   It works well for me.

When the project ends, I will disclose more about the player and the project these tracks were recorded for.   I hope to post the original song these are from as well.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: NelsonL on April 12, 2006, 10:06:57 pm
TheViking wrote on Wed, 12 April 2006 16:10

rattleyour wrote on Tue, 11 April 2006 18:57

Great sounds Kevin-- seriously rockin.

Is this at your place?  

A/D?


Thank you.

Yes, these were tracked at Viking.   There is a picture from this session on our MySpace...

http://myspace-272.vo.llnwd.net/00340/27/20/340210272_l.jpg

It's a ProTools Mix Plus rig with 888/24 IO's.   I'm running OSX with ProTools v.6.4.1 software.   It works well for me.

When the project ends, I will disclose more about the player and the project these tracks were recorded for.   I hope to post the original song these are from as well.


Yeah, I'd say it's workin' pretty well for you.

Man your room looks a lot like ours, I can't find a pic with the right perspective right now, but those red walls make me feel quite at home:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/24814296@N00/127718365/
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: Buzz on April 13, 2006, 11:28:40 am
Great timing on those tracks Viking Cudos to the drummer Oh ya and nice sound too !!!

LAter
BUzz

Now I just have to figure out how to tune my guitar !!!
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: garret on April 13, 2006, 03:21:12 pm
Eeeeevul.

Twisted Evil

That's what my tune is sounding like.... something about those drums, and that tuning, that is leading me to the dark side.

Not sure yet if it's good.. but it's something.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: Bivouac on April 13, 2006, 07:44:13 pm
I really like the drums as well.  I'm really not sure what I'm going to do with 'em yet.  I haven't tried out that tuning in a couple of months.  Going to finish up some stuff in the next few days, clear some hard drive space and get going...

I anticipate it will rock by the time I'm done...
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: John Ivan on April 14, 2006, 07:30:50 pm
Bivouac wrote on Thu, 13 April 2006 18:44

I really like the drums as well.  I'm really not sure what I'm going to do with 'em yet.  I haven't tried out that tuning in a couple of months.  Going to finish up some stuff in the next few days, clear some hard drive space and get going...

I anticipate it will rock by the time I'm done...



Ha!, I'm in the same boat. I'll get going next week. The tuning is crazy Shocked

JI.........................................
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: max cooper on April 16, 2006, 02:07:52 pm
garretg wrote on Tue, 11 April 2006 11:36

TheViking wrote on Tue, 11 April 2006 12:03


Rk - 421



Alright, I'll ask.   What's the abbreviation RK for?

-G



RAAWWWK!

oh.  Maybe it's rack tom.

BTW, I consulted the Oblique Strategies (vol. IV) right after I uploaded the drums to a Pro Tools session, and the card said "Reverse".

So I'm reversing some of the drums (for now).
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: Bivouac on April 17, 2006, 05:40:22 pm
Cool...

I might try to reverse a certain element at some point too if you don't mind.  It will most likely be more subtle than drums, but we'll see...
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: NelsonL on April 17, 2006, 06:07:05 pm
?niveK ot kcab skcart murd eht dnes dluohs ew snaem taht ebyaM
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: max cooper on April 17, 2006, 09:05:30 pm
How about just a reverse gate reverb for today?

The last card I drew said "take a break" so I'm off for a pint.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on April 18, 2006, 10:28:10 am
it's always time for a pint!

had 4 last night.....YUMMY!
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: Juergen on April 19, 2006, 11:28:42 am
14 hours, 18 minutes and 11 resumes later, i am good to go.
The tuning is the coolest and darkest I've ever encountered, so this should be a blast. Drums are great aswell.

About the (oblique strat.) cards: what are the guidelines for usage?
When inspiration runs out?
Every 47 minutes? (this whole thing smells of Rambaldi to me - finishing 4th season and i'm going nuts).
At all costs?
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: craig boychuk on April 19, 2006, 02:44:38 pm
j.hall wrote on Wed, 12 April 2006 17:16

since i'm not participating i sorta forgot about a deadline.

you guys tell me what you think.

end of may?



That sounds good to me...
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: max cooper on April 22, 2006, 12:26:02 pm
Juergen wrote on Wed, 19 April 2006 10:28



About the (oblique strat.) cards: what are the guidelines for usage?
When inspiration runs out?
Every 47 minutes?



This is a good question.

Here's what I've come up with (and thanks to j. hall for reminding me about the deck in the first place.  I've had it loaded as a Mac Widget for a while but had as yet not used it as a compositional/production tool.):

At first I'd flip a card and try to make what it said fit the situation.  And I figured it was best used as a tool to get out of a corner or a mental roadblock.

But now I think of it as a piece of outboard.  Try it, and if it doesn't help, toss it.  Flip it as many times as you need to get something that helps.  Sometimes it tells you to take a break.  Whatever.  But it's just a tool like any other that you have at your disposal.  (Remember to never put your hand in your disposal!)

It would be interesting to know of any instances where the deck added something that you really wouldn't have arrived at otherwise.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: Frob on April 24, 2006, 06:24:16 pm
where would some one get this "deck"
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: John Ivan on April 24, 2006, 09:50:53 pm
Frob wrote on Mon, 24 April 2006 17:24

where would some one get this "deck"


Hmmm, Good question. Where WOULD someone get this Deck?

JI.........................................
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on April 25, 2006, 10:08:51 am
if you have a mac you can download the widget, which i have done and it's pretty cool cause you get all four additions.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: floodstage on May 01, 2006, 11:08:26 pm
Finally got a start.  Just a chorus, but it's a start.  This tuning is making me work!  
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on May 02, 2006, 09:41:31 am
good.  that's the whole point.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: floodstage on May 02, 2006, 12:34:11 pm
Says the man who isn't participating!

Pantywaist!

hehehehehe







(did I say that out loud? ...... sorry)
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on May 02, 2006, 12:54:43 pm
oh great, is there another cape thing going on?
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: floodstage on May 02, 2006, 06:27:04 pm
Yeah.  CAPE # 4

It's CAPE 1 to me.

Banners galore till August 10th
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: scott volthause on May 02, 2006, 09:37:19 pm
Man I totally lost track of time on this. I downloaded the tracks.

Sometimes my slackness amazes even me.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: John Ivan on May 03, 2006, 02:39:03 pm
j.hall wrote on Tue, 02 May 2006 11:54

oh great, is there another cape thing going on?



Yep but I'm out this year. WAY to much going on. I'm gonna try to get this done though. I down loaded the tracks a while back but have not even tuned yet. I'll get something down soon. I'll let the tuning push me along. Should be fun.

JI....................................................
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: chris haines on May 05, 2006, 12:40:30 pm
i'm gonna tweak it if I get time, but I'm slammed for the rest of the month:

http://www.anonymousbosch.com/Faith%20Vox4.mp3

Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on May 17, 2006, 12:28:30 pm
only a few weeks left.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: garret on May 17, 2006, 02:29:17 pm
j.hall wrote on Wed, 17 May 2006 12:28

only a few weeks left.


Yepper.    Shocked

I have a tune.  It's strange.  Maybe good.  Not evil anymore, but rather moody.  Ozzy meets the moody blues meets modest mouse.

It's rough as hell, but I think I can beat it into shape now.
Oddly enough, the tuning isn't what's giving me trouble -- the drums are just too rockin for my usual style of songwriting & production.  

Good thing is, I got two songs out of this... with my fav acoustic tied up in that tuning, I ended up writing something else that I like even more.   Makin lemonade I guess.

The clouds lifting a bit, J?  Seems like you're posting a bit more again.

-Garret
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on May 18, 2006, 03:39:59 pm
yeah, i'm getting a better handle on the schedule, though i just got some new deadlines that might crush me.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: John Ivan on May 20, 2006, 01:16:34 am
I'm On the Road and have only down Loaded the drums so, I'll be scrambling when I get home to knock something out.

Sometimes I write good stuff when I only have a week and spend long hours per day.

Things have suddenly gone nut's and I'm either flying, driving, writing, or something. Crazy.

JI....................................
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: John Ivan on May 23, 2006, 12:46:39 pm
Well crap. I'm out. I have something everyday almost and a lot of it is miles away. I would like to still finish something but it wont be in time so as it relates to stop date. I wont make it.

Sorry..

JI................................
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on May 30, 2006, 06:01:21 pm
deadlines deadlines.............

anyone finished?
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: floodstage on May 30, 2006, 11:02:05 pm
I'm not done.

I have a truckload of excuses but excuses won't finish the recording.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: garret on May 31, 2006, 01:46:10 pm
floodstage wrote on Tue, 30 May 2006 23:02

I'm not done.

I have a truckload of excuses but excuses won't finish the recording.


Yep, same here... how 'bout an extension?

I am very interested in this... and getting somewhere.. just didn't have time to finish things up over the holiday weekend, like I thought.

-Garret
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: scott volthause on May 31, 2006, 06:29:29 pm
yeah, i'm not done either. i've been crushed with the 'summer rush.'

i'd second the request for an extension if that would be acceptable.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: Juergen on June 01, 2006, 01:50:45 am
hahahaha.

I havent had internet in the past couple of days, so I busted my nuts over finishing the damn thing, rushed over to some computer to hand in "the assignment," worried that it's past end of may by an hour and a half...

Makes me think twice over redoing a bunch of stuff which i didnt end up liking as much as i would if i did it over again...

Or I could discipline myself and stop dicking around...or I guess I am done.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on June 01, 2006, 01:28:11 pm
how long you guys need?

another month?
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: garret on June 01, 2006, 03:25:30 pm
j.hall wrote on Thu, 01 June 2006 13:28

how long you guys need?

another month?


How long can we have?
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on June 01, 2006, 04:03:30 pm
whatever.

some one pick a realistic deadline that we can get at least 5 songs to listen to and let me know.

Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: floodstage on June 01, 2006, 06:03:53 pm
I can get mine done in a month or less.  
How 'bout July 4 for a new deadline?  
I'll set off the fireworks to celebrate!
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: garret on June 01, 2006, 07:12:19 pm
floodstage wrote on Thu, 01 June 2006 18:03

How 'bout July 4 for a new deadline?


Works for me.  

Maybe if we had a bit more chatter, people would realize this thing is on, and get to work.

Chatter, chatter.

How's it going, fellow participants?

My track is dope but horribly flawed.   Gotta fix the flaw, then I think it'll be a good un.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: Rivers on June 01, 2006, 11:11:05 pm
July 4th would work for me.
I've been swamped and just starting to dig out.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on June 02, 2006, 10:40:08 am
jul 4th it is.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: floodstage on June 02, 2006, 12:53:10 pm
Thank you, oh magnanimous and most powerful leader!

I will endeavor to perservere.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: Juergen on June 02, 2006, 02:51:33 pm
Great, now I'll be recalling the mix for another month. Evil or Very Mad
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: floodstage on June 02, 2006, 02:52:14 pm
Do the extended dance re-mix version!
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: Juergen on June 03, 2006, 03:07:21 pm
i was thinking reggaeton...
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: chris haines on June 04, 2006, 10:06:19 am
j.hall wrote on Wed, 31 May 2006 00:01

deadlines deadlines.............

anyone finished?


yeah...did you do that stereo mix of the drums...i'd like to fvck with it if you did...

Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on June 05, 2006, 09:51:37 am
no one asked me to do it, so i did not.

i can probably get it done in the next few weeks.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: garret on July 03, 2006, 03:44:04 pm
Getting to be the 4th... and I think I've gotten this as far as I can take it... here's my submission.

Aston Martin

-Garret
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: Juergen on July 04, 2006, 10:42:48 am
Is there any place we can upload our submissions to?
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: garret on July 04, 2006, 12:13:04 pm
If you don't have your own website, try one of the many free file hosting sites...

Here's one that seems okay:

http://www.supload.com/free-audio-hosting

-Garret
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: Juergen on July 05, 2006, 08:35:10 am
Cool, thanks!
I'm working on my upload (dial-up is on pita).
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: Juergen on July 05, 2006, 10:38:49 am
Whattaya know, eternity has an end after all.
Here's what I got.

Allison
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: floodstage on July 05, 2006, 11:20:28 am
Well, I finished also (sort of)

Worked on the song a little (very little) and then procrastinated a lot.  Procrastinated some more. ..... and some more

Notice calendar, it's July 4th!  Shit! I'm not asking for another extension.  Time to do a studio quickie.

(Of course I decide to do this after a July 4 "incident" w/a boat trailer hitch that left me temporarily unable to use my left index finger.  (ever do the exact thing you were trying consciously to avoid?  I did it yesterday.  D'uohhhhh!  Luckily, the finger will recover, it's just not useful at the moment)

So,  it's 7 p.m. July 4.  I come up with a simple chord pattern and lay down some basic tracks.  Since I currently have only 4 good fingers on my left hand, the resulting guitar and bass tracks are played with less intonation and accuracy than I would have liked!

So the tracks are down, time for vocals.  Quickly, I realize I can't sing in the key I recorded the song in.  Just not my day.

I'm wondering what to do and go down stairs for a break and notice  my wife is practicing flute.  Hmmmm.....  I go in, and interrupt her and ask:  "Could you record some flute for me (translation: "Would you mind saving my ass again?")

With her help, 45 minutes later, I have something that is probably quite different than the other songs if for no other reason than instrument choice.

BTW, if you listen carefully, you can hear fireworks in the background of her tracks.  There was a huge fireworks display blasting away last night while we recorded her parts.

Here it is:

She's Coming Home
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: floodstage on July 05, 2006, 11:40:54 pm
Listening to all the tracks that are up so far this evening.

chris haines, you rock!  Like the song a lot.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: Juergen on July 06, 2006, 01:25:22 pm
floodstage wrote on Wed, 05 July 2006 23:40

Listening to all the tracks that are up so far this evening.

chris haines, you rock!  Like the song a lot.



I think you meant Garret?
I like it a lot too!

And yours definitely rocks aswell.
Those flutes are very cool.
Sorry to hear about the accident.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: floodstage on July 06, 2006, 01:37:08 pm
chris haines wrote on Fri, 05 May 2006 11:40

i'm gonna tweak it if I get time, but I'm slammed for the rest of the month:

http://www.anonymousbosch.com/Faith%20Vox4.mp3




This is the one I was talking about!
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: floodstage on July 06, 2006, 01:42:45 pm
Juergen wrote on Thu, 06 July 2006 12:25


Sorry to hear about the accident.


My finger is doing much better and will be fine.
If it had been 1/2" further to the left and I'd only have 4 fingers now.
Luckily, I just have a really ugly blood blister on the finger tip instead.
I wish I had a lame excuse like being drunk or high, but it was just pure stupidity in action.

(Must be dain bramaage from too much LDS in the 60's!)
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: garret on July 06, 2006, 02:12:18 pm
I'm listening to the tracks now too... dang my stuff sounds like ass. Smile Can't seem to get rid of boxy tones in the vocals... got a shiny rode k2 on order that hopefully will be an upgrade over the mxl 1006 I'm using now.

Well it's always good to keep yourself humble... there's a reason audio engineering isn't my full time work (yet).

Some notes on my track...
-- vocals and acoustic were tracked in my home "studio" -- not much acoustic treatment and cheap monitors (maudio bx5 + consumer subwoofer)
-- vocal mic is a mxl 1006 large cap condenser, acoustic is a mxl 603s at the 12th fret and the 1006 over the shoulder
-- using the echo gina 3g pres
-- mixed in the box, in cakewalk sonar home studio
-- control strip (eq/comp/gate) is wavearts trackplug
-- drums were cut up, looped, and made to follow a new tempo map
-- mellotron flutes are mtron
-- bass is a sampled rickenbacker from sonic synth
-- french horn toward the end is from garritan personal orchestra

Ok folks, who else has a tune they can submit?   30-something people signed up, and we have four entries?  Rough ideas are cool... let's see whatcha got.

I'll post reviews of the tunes when I've had a chance to listen to them a few more times.

-Garret
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: floodstage on July 06, 2006, 02:57:24 pm
Gear notes:

Bass - Fender Heartfield -> Sansamp bass driver DI -> API 512c
1 track - 3 takes to get it

Guitars -> Fender Fat Tele (Squire Indonesia) -> Marshall JCM 800 2205 head -> Fender 2 x 12 cab w/Peavey Sheffields (Celestion wanna-be's) -> SM-57 -> API 512c
3 tracks - 1 main and 2 more panned L & R behind main gtr
quite a few takes - very hard to keep the low string in tune to C using a guitar strung with .009's!

Flutes -> Hanes flute -> Royer 121 ->API 512c
4 tracks - 6 takes

Super Kick Ass Drums - provided by 3rd party - made it totally fun!!!
------------------------------------------------------------
No compression going in

Used the Compressors, EQ's, and Reverb on my D8B -> Finalizer ->CD Burner
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: Juergen on July 06, 2006, 09:07:55 pm
Shit, gear notes...let's see, how do i post this without feeling embarrased...

Ok: "this is all i had at the time of doing it."

Everything was carbon copied at home through a Behringer SuperMoist MX2004 (Burrownger).

Drums: Yes, thank you once again, Viking! Other than pasting an 'exact' portion of the latter part of the song to fit the intro part of my song (the original 'intro' didn't have as much energy as the 'outro' but i wanted it to), and cutting the drum fill after the silence, nothing more was done in terms of editing...

Bass: generic 5-string fender squier/Boss SD-3
Acoustic Guit: Some SD ADK Mic a little below the 12th fret and off to the right of the  hole if you're looking at it about 5 inches away/MOTU896 pre (the only one escaping the Burrownger)
Dist Guit L/R: Les Paul Standard/Boss SD3/Marshall JTM30/Sennheiser 421

For what it's worth, after recording the guitars...way after...i realized they were too distorted and vowed to do them over again, and even though i sorta noticed it during tracking, I failed to mention this fact to myself at the time (gosh, what an idiot). Turns out they stayed that way until the end, and i never got a cleaner tone into the song.

Wah Guit: Les Paul Standard/Nigel
Vocals: Rode NTK/FMR RNLA and SM58

Keys:- MTron Choir buried towards the R
   - FM7 Synth in Logic (stereo, panned middleish)
   - Some choir sample off (Symphony of Voices) in fast part of the song
   - EVP88 Electric Piano Thing (Logic)
   - Piano (Logic Factory Sample)

'Twas mixed in the box - UAD1 pluggies mostly...

Chris Haines post: i hadn't noticed that one.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on July 07, 2006, 11:35:33 am
cool stuff guys.

funny how so many signed up and only three submitted.  

anyway.......

i'm really digging how each of you approached the drums very differently.

aside from the parts being the same, the drum sounds are totally different!!!!

cool ideas for something that kind of tied your hands.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: chris haines on July 07, 2006, 01:04:53 pm
thanks floodstage for the kind words.  I thought everyone was going to rip on me for the AC/DC sample...

it was interesting to hear how everybody dealt with all the splash on that ride or that crash that was being played like a ride...try as I might, I couldn't get it out...but the drum sounds were really nice, especially kik & snare, thanks viking.

never got around to my tweak, too much travel between continents in the last month but it was fun and do I get a free J.Hall mix for submitting on time the first time 'round?

Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: garret on July 07, 2006, 01:19:22 pm
chris haines wrote on Fri, 07 July 2006 13:04


it was interesting to hear how everybody dealt with all the splash on that ride or that crash that was being played like a ride...try as I might, I couldn't get it out...but the drum sounds were really nice, especially kik & snare, thanks viking.



Indeed, those were much better drums than I'm used to working with.  (Usually I have to deal with sampled drums or living room two-mic recordings).

All that wash from the ride was really something else... I kept trying to tame it with more and high shelf... probably went too far, but to my ears it was just overwhelming the mix.   I ended up mixing in almost no hihat mic, because there was so much cymbal stuff going on already.

I like really dry drums (evil I know), so it was a fun challenge to mix such a roomy set of tracks.

-G
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: Juergen on July 07, 2006, 01:21:45 pm
floodstage wrote on Thu, 06 July 2006 13:37

chris haines wrote on Fri, 05 May 2006 11:40

i'm gonna tweak it if I get time, but I'm slammed for the rest of the month:

http://www.anonymousbosch.com/Faith%20Vox4.mp3




This is the one I was talking about!


wow chris, that is some serious rocking!

Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: scott volthause on July 07, 2006, 04:24:30 pm
I have failed. I humbly bow before the leader and participants in this audio quest to ask for your forgiveness.

My summer has been rather unconventional thus far, and I have only now come up for air.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: floodstage on July 07, 2006, 04:51:40 pm
Hey, do we get to hear the song the drums were recorded for originally?


Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: garret on July 07, 2006, 05:22:43 pm
scott volthause wrote on Fri, 07 July 2006 16:24

I have failed. I humbly bow before the leader and participants in this audio quest to ask for your forgiveness.




Your contrition appears to be genuine.

For your penance, you must now listen loudly to the Ethel Merman Disco Album, and dance around your house/apartment wearing vinyl pants.  With the shades open.

Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: scott volthause on July 07, 2006, 05:28:20 pm
oh god.

i'll post a submission by tomorrow, i promise.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: Juergen on July 07, 2006, 09:48:34 pm
chris haines wrote on Fri, 07 July 2006 13:04

thanks floodstage for the kind words.  I thought everyone was going to rip on me for the AC/DC sample...




are you talking about those bends?

The spashing of the cymbals...i really liked the idea of what was being played, but it was just really splashy. So this whole time, I had this "make it louder! no wait, turn it down!" thing going on, through out the whole process...
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: Juergen on July 07, 2006, 09:53:25 pm
[quote title=garretg wrote on Fri, 07 July 2006 13:19]
chris haines wrote on Fri, 07 July 2006 13:04

I like really dry drums (evil I know), so it was a fun challenge to mix such a roomy set of tracks.

-G


Dry drums evil? I normally like to go with roomy, but this time around I thought "i should make them really dry."

never quite succeeded.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: garret on July 07, 2006, 10:16:09 pm
Juergen wrote on Fri, 07 July 2006 21:53


Dry drums evil? I normally like to go with roomy, but this time around I thought "i should make them really dry."

never quite succeeded.


Well, I think there's a camp of engineers that really likes the ultra roomy sound, throw a sm58 up in the corner of the room and hey, that's the sound.   I worked with a drummer who was hysterical, indeed he wanted the drum mix to be 90% the hallway mic.   And I wanted to throw out that track, cause it was just a mash of confused reverberations.

I love the sound of a really dry, unnatural, close miked kit... 70s pop, steely dan, etc...  course I also love motown drum sounds and phil spector, so ack maybe I do't know what I really like.  heh.

-G
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: TheViking on July 08, 2006, 02:08:33 am
Thanks guys...   it's really awesome to hear distinctly different ideas come out of this odd tuning and drum performance.   I've really enjoyed listening to all of the submissions (so far - I hope there are more on the way).

A little background on the drum tracks...   The drum tracks were recorded back in September, 2005 here at Viking Studios.   The band is Seven Head Division from Rochester, NY, a three piece indie outfit that did some heavy touring in the late 90's and then settled into our local scene here with moderate success.   We're getting ready to cut final vocals for the record soon but I will try to find a rough mix of what we have for the song so far and post it for you guys to hear the original tune.

The drumset itself is an Ayotte custom set with a Ludwig maple snare.   Pictures of this set from this very session are on our MySpace page.   The drummer is Andy King, member of this band and also fill in touring drummer for the rock band Project 86.

My live room is a work in progress.   It's factory space that I'm still learning how to control.   Splashy is an understatement.   Its downright harsh at times.   Since this recording we've thrown up some absorbtion and diffusion and that seems to be helping.   I hesitate in getting really 'into it' there since I may be moving into new space sooner as opposed to later, so...   there you have my lame-assed excuse for the splashy drum tracks.   LOL.

Seriously, thanks for using them.   Any suggestions or comments on the drum tracks specifically would be a huge help.

http://www.sevenheaddivision.com
http://www.myspace.com/sevenheaddivision
http://www.vikingrecording.com
http://www.myspace.com/vikingrecording

Enjoy!

Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: chris haines on July 08, 2006, 06:16:59 am
Juergen wrote on Sat, 08 July 2006 03:48

chris haines wrote on Fri, 07 July 2006 13:04

thanks floodstage for the kind words.  I thought everyone was going to rip on me for the AC/DC sample...




are you talking about those bends?




put the intro to back in black in the breakdown in the middle before the chorus, with the first guitar chord pitched down and first...
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: chris haines on July 08, 2006, 06:44:58 am
so, I expected that with an exercise like this, I would have walked away thinking that drummers actually contribute more to songwriting than I normally credit them for, but I think that after hearing the diversity of the submissions, it's actually had the opposite effect on me.

I always cut the drummer in on writing credit if they are in the room playing while I'm writing, 'cause I do consider it a collaborative process, and I think that I wouldn't be making the choices that I'm making if I wasn't playing with the drummer at that moment.  I'll tweak and finish without their participation, but if they were around at the inception of the tune, they always get credit from me.  This of course differs from walking into the rehearsal room with completed melody lyrics & chord progressions which imply bass lines and drum arrangements...

so...when you're working with established drum tracks which imply a rhythmic base for the song, but leave you open with regard to melody, lyrics, and chord and song structures...where does that leave the drummer as a writer...?  If you strip the drums away, you have 4 totally different songs in this case, I wouldn't suspect that any of them originated from the same drum tracks...and yet they did.

though purely academic at this point, it would be interesting if the the drummer is not a writer on the original recording his tracks were taken from and ends up being one on all of these submissions.  Ethically I'd cut him in, but I wouldn't expect everybody to agree with me about the degree of the drummer's participation in creation of the song...If a song ultimately breaks down to melody and lyrics, where does the drummer fit in as a writer if he/she doesn't participate in those areas...?  I find this to be a grey area even after having spent 5 years doing music publishing professionally in the early to mid 90s.


sorry for the left turn regarding intellectual property rights, but I think it's related to the thread and interesting...

Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: Juergen on July 08, 2006, 03:41:53 pm
chris haines wrote on Sat, 08 July 2006 06:44




sorry for the left turn regarding intellectual property rights, but I think it's related to the thread and interesting...





Indeed. I'd think - let's say in a rehearsal situation - it would depend on what role the drums of any instrument played in the creation of the song. If we're speaking of simple accompaniment, which sometimes is the right thing for that song ('implied'), i wouldn't see why to give the musician that happened to be playing that part writing credit, whether the song was in the process of being finished at the time or whether this person just happened to walk into the band and added a part that didn't exist before.

I'd guess it's very similar in this situation. If the song was being done in the tuning, and the drums later just chopped up to be made fit, I'd think the person doing that editing would have played greater role than the drummer in the beginning, creating new parts and gettnig a larger share of songwriter credits. Which I think wouldn't be too different from someone else in the band telling the drummer what to play, where to put the fills, and the drummer being this totally passive musician.

In my case though, I accepted the drums as telling me how the song would be, and I only censored the drums in a couple of places, but i based my whole arrangement on the song form that the drums dictated, making the drummer part songwriter. I think it would be ethical and fair to give him credit, but not if the drums were used differenly while songwriting.

Maybe i am way off here. (i did not work in publishing except for a temp job)
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: floodstage on July 08, 2006, 04:23:22 pm
I've wondered if one of the songs turned into something, where should writing credit go?  Would the drums get any?

I know the drums put me in a mood, and I also know my song would have sounded very different with different drums, but I don't know if it's co-writing

hmmmmmm
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: Juergen on July 08, 2006, 04:24:49 pm
garretg wrote on Fri, 07 July 2006 22:16

Juergen wrote on Fri, 07 July 2006 21:53


Dry drums evil? I normally like to go with roomy, but this time around I thought "i should make them really dry."

never quite succeeded.


Well, I think there's a camp of engineers that really likes the ultra roomy sound, throw a sm58 up in the corner of the room and hey, that's the sound.   I worked with a drummer who was hysterical, indeed he wanted the drum mix to be 90% the hallway mic.   And I wanted to throw out that track, cause it was just a mash of confused reverberations.

I love the sound of a really dry, unnatural, close miked kit... 70s pop, steely dan, etc...  course I also love motown drum sounds and phil spector, so ack maybe I do't know what I really like.  heh.

-G


You're just liking what sounds nicest to you at the moment of desicion.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: garret on July 08, 2006, 10:14:05 pm
chris haines wrote on Sat, 08 July 2006 06:44



sorry for the left turn regarding intellectual property rights, but I think it's related to the thread and interesting...




Those are indeed very interesting questions.  I've thought about that stuff before too, and always hesitated to post asking because I don't want people to think I'm some prima donna who thinks every little exercise I participate in is going to yield a masterpiece.

But I did think about that before working on this track.  After having written dozens of tunes, I now know that when I work on something, unless I completely give up, I'm going to end up with something at the end.  Will it be a great tune, I dunno... but it will be something.  It's sort of like buying a house... if you're not sure you want to buy a house, don't go talk to a realtor.  Once you start meeting with a realtor, you're going to end up buying a house.  

So I know this was unlikely (for me) to be a throwaway exercise.  My thinking was, go head, write a genius tune, and work out the credit details later if it happens.

If I were to release my tune as is (with these drum tracks), what would I think appropriate?  Honestly, I'd probably figure out who the drummer is, and I'd offer a credit (drumming on track #7 by john doe) and a retroactive studio session fee.  Maybe the key thing is that my song arrangement is not the same as the original drum track.  I really just thought of those drum tracks as a drum loop library, and created a new song out of the loops.

-Garret
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: TheViking on July 08, 2006, 11:54:56 pm
garretg wrote on Sat, 08 July 2006 22:14

If I were to release my tune as is (with these drum tracks), what would I think appropriate?  Honestly, I'd probably figure out who the drummer is, and I'd offer a credit (drumming on track #7 by john doe) and a retroactive studio session fee.



Um...   Andy King...   not John Doe.

I thought we went over this...   gaheeeeez!
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: garret on July 09, 2006, 12:07:43 am
TheViking wrote on Sat, 08 July 2006 23:54


Um...   Andy King...   not John Doe.

I thought we went over this...   gaheeeeez!



Doe! er Doh!

Scrolling up....   Ah, yes I see. Andy King. Thanks for the great drumming, Andy!  : Cool

Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on July 10, 2006, 12:06:42 pm
according to the government, drums are not a melody producing instrument, thus not able to claim song writing copyrights, as they define song writing as the distinct melody of a song.  or something like that.

therefore, and considering if i'm 100% right, no matter what capacity the drummer has in the writing process he is only able to claim copyright if the band has "signed him on" as such.
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: Juergen on July 11, 2006, 12:43:48 am
Well that's Interesting.

What does this mean? I know the courts decide on what it ultimately means, but...would this mean people can't get sued over rythmic arrangments, as long as they're not sampled off of the original?

As in...i release my song on a recording, with these drum tracks and there's no paperwork for licensing?

I see a permission to using the tracks for a public release fitting somewhere really obvious into this (don't know where though...)

juergen
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: j.hall on July 11, 2006, 10:31:21 am
i'd say that technically, viking gained permission from the artist (who he and i both know) for this whole thing to happen.  if you were to release the track ona  commercial release, i'm not sure anything would happen as you had permission to use the tracks.  would you be a super big A-hole for doing such a thing........YES.

i think it comes down to how you choose to treat people.

in this particular case, i would not only credit the original source and people who worked on it, i would contact them and ask how they wanted to handle it.

aside from paying the drummer a small "session" fee, i'm not entirely sure i'd offer anything else.

i tend to agree with the government, honestly......it's not a decernable melody that you've "stolen".  it's just drums.....you could rebuild that entire song using samples and a drum machine......
Title: Re: I.M.P 4 discusion.
Post by: Juergen on July 11, 2006, 05:04:34 pm
j.hall wrote on Tue, 11 July 2006 10:31

i'd say that technically, viking gained permission from the artist (who he and i both know) for this whole thing to happen.  if you were to release the track ona  commercial release, i'm not sure anything would happen as you had permission to use the tracks.  would you be a super big A-hole for doing such a thing........YES.

i think it comes down to how you choose to treat people.




It does indeed. I agree that a person doing something like this would be an a-hole. And I am sure there would be a difference between having gotten permission to do this creative experiment, and permission to put the song with these drums on a commercial release.

So I'd imagine the whole thing being different if i got myself another drummer who'd play this whole thing over again, with arrangements. This would prob fall into what was mentioned earlier in regards to drums not receiving songwriter credit.