i just had an idea!

wouldn't it funny/amazing if all CDs came with producer's/engineer's commentary- like a DVD!?!?!?!?!?!

wouldn't that be just AWESOME???

just imagine:

David M. Allen on Disintigration:
"...now this was a good vocal track- but the poor assistant had to clean Robert's lipstick and beer-puke off the pop filter after every take!"

Hugh Padham in recording Sting:
"....we found this clamp that the vocal coach affixed to his testicles to make him sing like that...at first he objected, but i told him that the French having been doing it that way for years, so he'd never really be too bothered about it..."

Lanois on recording Bono:
"...also we had Eno fill a big sampler filled with 32 banks of his high screams, "yeahs!" and "woooh-hooos!" so that the Edge could "play" them in later as an overdub. "

BUT WHY STOP THERE?

they could also make it so you could have the option to listen to an album in:
-mono.
-stereo.
-Dolby 5.1
-with triggered drums.
-sans Auto-Tune.
-with the Jordanaires doing all background vocals.
-with a house beat playing throughout.
-with a tap delay where you can add delay to the vocals and control the time, feedback, and mix with your remote.
-unmastered.
-remastered.
-remastered by "Virtual Bob Ludwig" plug-in.
-remixed by "Virtual Bob Clearmountain" or "Wallace Hit Factory" or "Puig's Billboard Chartbusters" plug-ins.
-remix the entire album with your remote.
-"scratch tracks" mode.
-studio DAT "between takes banter" special features option.
-with extra fart noises (ala "Wet Hot American Summer" DVD).
-with all the lyrics in Ukrainian.

THE POSSIBILITES ARE LIMITLESS!!!!

i am going to be thinking about this all night.
man, it's scary when i think of something silly like this and then i think "wow, i could actually envisioning that happening someday!"
scary!

capnreverb wrote:1. do you like the record?

do you like the record?


2. You should only give a shit about how it was recorded if you are interested in how to make/not make it sound that way. Or are interested in the process in terms of process sake.
3. If you hear a song and like it, but all of a sudden don't like it because you found out it was recorded using triggers/samples/etc. you are a dunce.
4. Either it's crap or not crap. If they used a robot testicle to get the vocals right through the hamburglars small intestine, does it matter from a listenesrs sake? Outside of recording dorks like myself, who the fuck cares that butch vig compressed the hell out of it?
5. from a purely average listener standpoint IT DOES NOT MATTER HOW OR WHY IT WAS RECORDED, ONLY IF IT SOUNDS GOOD.

6. It only matters if it sounds the way you want it to sound. No wafle factor!

I am going to have to agree in principal to everything started above, testicles and Hamburglers included.

Here is one thing, though that is otherwise. Most modern commercial type studios have Bob Clearmountain's drum samples. They are like an industry standard. It is also commonplace on commercial records to record the drummer playing drums then go in and replace the snares and kicks and toms with Bob Clearmountain's snares, kicks, and toms. It is actually a very very simple process. Yes, in principal I think as long as it sounds good, it is good but this scenario worries me and makes me think there is a bit of laziness and 'fix it in the mix' mentality that lowers the standards of musicianship and the making of interesting and different and unique recordings. I mean, what is the point?

Sampling, she is a moot point these days unless you want to start whipping the analogue vs digital horse again since anything recorded using a DAW is 'sampled'.

Anyway as has already been stated; either it's CRAP or NOT CRAP.

I have an EMU ESI4000 (Turbo). My favourite thing to sample is the sound of dogs barking and then play this sound over the full range of my keyboard.

WOOF woof woof woofwoof WOOFWOOF woof woof woofwoof WOOFWOOF woof woof woofwoof WOOFWOOF woof woof woofwoof WOOFWOOF woof woof woofwoof WOOF

Rimbaud III wrote:I have an EMU ESI4000 (Turbo). My favourite thing to sample is the sound of dogs barking and then play this sound over the full range of my keyboard.

WOOF woof woof woofwoof WOOFWOOF woof woof woofwoof WOOFWOOF woof woof woofwoof WOOFWOOF woof woof woofwoof WOOFWOOF woof woof woofwoof WOOF

That's impossible!!

You've been warned about your outlandish claims relating to insanely futuristic devices for the LAST TIME!!

Champion Rabbit wrote:

Rimbaud III wrote:I have an EMU ESI4000 (Turbo). My favourite thing to sample is the sound of dogs barking and then play this sound over the full range of my keyboard.

WOOF woof woof woofwoof WOOFWOOF woof woof woofwoof WOOFWOOF woof woof woofwoof WOOFWOOF woof woof woofwoof WOOFWOOF woof woof woofwoof WOOF

That's impossible!!

You've been warned about your outlandish claims relating to insanely futuristic devices for the LAST TIME!!

I write music of - nay - from the future. I think it's time for me to get some webs space to showcase said future music. Le Musique Futuristique - C'est Chic.

A friend recently told me that he "discovered" that the guitars on Smells Like Teenspirit are samples. Well, to be honest I haven't heard it for a while but he says that you can hear it quite well on the main riff because the "whacka-whacka" overtones are all identical.

max wrote:A friend recently told me that he "discovered" that the guitars on Smells Like Teenspirit are samples. Well, to be honest I haven't heard it for a while but he says that you can hear it quite well on the main riff because the "whacka-whacka" overtones are all identical.

Re-using a section of a single take throughout a track is hardly 'sampling'. It's a technique that was popular years before digital audio.

How is that not sampling? I think that is how I would define sampling. The Mellotron is an example of early sampling which was used by the beatles. The only difference here is that the samples were stored on magnetic tape and not stored digitally. Sampling is the process of recording a piece of sound and playing that sound again in a creative way. It does not make a difference if it is used to emulate a musician or used to sound abstract - the methods are the same - sample and trigger.

However, I'm not sure if I would call using ProTools sampling. Is it? You can effectively use it as a sampler if you wish - copying and repeating audio, moving edits into time, etc.

At the end of the day though, it doesn't really matter at all as far as the record is concerned. I was only ever interested in whether people thought this approach of sampling a band was ok. I'm not sure.

Rodabod wrote:How is that not sampling? I think that is how I would define sampling. The Mellotron is an example of early sampling which was used by the beatles. The only difference here is that the samples were stored on magnetic tape and not stored digitally. Sampling is the process of recording a piece of sound and playing that sound again in a creative way. It does not make a difference if it is used to emulate a musician or used to sound abstract - the methods are the same - sample and trigger.

However, I'm not sure if I would call using ProTools sampling. Is it? You can effectively use it as a sampler if you wish - copying and repeating audio, moving edits into time, etc.

At the end of the day though, it doesn't really matter at all as far as the record is concerned. I was only ever interested in whether people thought this approach of sampling a band was ok. I'm not sure.

The terminology used in the thread is getting hopelessly confused.

DAWs are 'samplers' to the extent that the recordings they make are not analogous of the sound source. Any digital recording contains 'samples' of the original sound source.

If you are suggesting that comping takes and cutting and splicing tape is sampling too, as is the Mellotron, as is (presuambly) any multi-tracked recording that isn't made in a single pass then I don't know how useful a discussion this is...