Members Arranger Posted July 26, 2002 Members Share Posted July 26, 2002 Why do I feel like I have to throw some sharply defined dead space cut offs and instant crescendos in my modern compositions? Do you think my feelings are a direct result of an appreciation for what's now possible in the extreme dynamic range of digital production? Or, am I just miffed by how often it's used these days? Maybe I've been slowly brainwashed into thinking that this style of music really is impressive. I hear it all the time now. A plodding lead-in followed by the "fall into silence", then a sharply slammed retort in search of the maximum "wow" effect possible for the listener. Years ago, this didn't seem to be a trick that was used so often. And it's so clean. I mean, the dynamics are unreal. Tunage, followed by absolute silence, or an unreal coffee-can mix, or some tiny drum taps, that are almost indiscernable, then... WOH - a friggin' army of sound slams you against the wall. You sit there jiggling wondering if you should shreak, punch a wall, or just stab and steer whatever you're driving. Some compositions are unreal in their use of this technique. It can comprise virtually the entire song. What's the message? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members billyscorps86 Posted July 26, 2002 Members Share Posted July 26, 2002 I think this method is a good excitement-builder, especially in rock music. I find the silence to be most effective either after the intro to a song by leading in to the first verse, or placed before the last chorus. If its used more than once or twice in a song though, i hate it... annoys the hell out of me. Just my thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members zuul777 Posted July 26, 2002 Members Share Posted July 26, 2002 i find myself doing ALOT of that in most of my classical compositions. sharp entrances and cutoffs, extreme loudness/fullness, then dropdown to something quiet and mellow then all of sudden a huge royal sound..... most things sound good, but the feedback i get most of the time is that it changes too quickly. i find it too boring to repeat part of a composition unless its like 2 minutes apart at least....maybe i suck at this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Kingnome Posted July 26, 2002 Members Share Posted July 26, 2002 The early part of this decade will be remembered as the "dynamic extremes" period in popular music. Soooo over done these days. Seems (to me, at least) that every band has that clean/acoustic verse followed by the obligatory slamming chorus. Boooorrrrringgg! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members SomeGuyNamedRob Posted July 26, 2002 Members Share Posted July 26, 2002 Originally posted by Kingnome The early part of this decade will be remembered as the "dynamic extremes" period in popular music. Soooo over done these days. Seems (to me, at least) that every band has that clean/acoustic verse followed by the obligatory slamming chorus. Boooorrrrringgg! I think the early part of most decades are like that. The Police and Nirvana did a lot of "big dynamics" between verse/chorus, though to a lesser extent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members zuul777 Posted July 26, 2002 Members Share Posted July 26, 2002 Originally posted by Kingnome The early part of this decade will be remembered as the "dynamic extremes" period in popular music. Soooo over done these days. Seems (to me, at least) that every band has that clean/acoustic verse followed by the obligatory slamming chorus. Boooorrrrringgg! i suppose im partially guilty of that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members WattsUrizen Posted July 27, 2002 Members Share Posted July 27, 2002 I think that it's mostly to do with the modern mindset of people. Most people are after quick and easy entertainment. Not many people want to listen to a long piece of music which develops slowly. They want music that's in their face, lots of changes and dynamics. For instance, the final movement of Beethoven's final piano sonata is a brilliant set of variations. But it's very serene, untroubledc and unclimactic, which is why it's unpopular. There isn't enough instant gratification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Kingnome Posted July 27, 2002 Members Share Posted July 27, 2002 Originally posted by Anomandaris I think that it's mostly to do with the modern mindset of people....... There isn't enough instant gratification. This may be it, really. It seems to me like there is no other formula anymore. "Instant gratification" makes alot of sense in a digital world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members zuul777 Posted July 27, 2002 Members Share Posted July 27, 2002 a while ago, i wrote this mini symphony type thing with MIDI on a decent sound card. to this day i still kinda like it, although its pretty much a bunch of OK sounding clips of things smashed into a 3 minute peice....check it out, lets hear some comments! hahaha. ill have to upload some of my newer ones, but this way i wanna see if i was a natural from the start! http://www.zuulmusic.com/billsymph.mp3 ps- this is classical like Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members WattsUrizen Posted July 28, 2002 Members Share Posted July 28, 2002 Well, it is very amateurish Some of the orchestration is wrong, and it seems to me just a tune with some chords underneath. But some of the harmony is nice. What I'm most interested in is how you converted MIDI into mp3? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members zuul777 Posted July 28, 2002 Members Share Posted July 28, 2002 ill have to get some of my newer crap up. to convert MIDI to mp3, theres a few different ways with a few different steps involved. One way: If your soundcard supports it, have a WAV recorder recording while the MIDI is playing back. Then save it as a WAV file. Then use a converter to convert a WAV file to MP3. I use Creative Digital Audio Center, which came with my sound blaster live platinum soundcard. Another way I used: Have the computer's output going into two channels (R and L) on my mixer, and then use my ADAT rig to record just the two tracks. Then play the ADATs back while recording with the computer, then go through the file saving and converting steps. i know more about computers/audio than music sometimes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members WattsUrizen Posted July 28, 2002 Members Share Posted July 28, 2002 Originally posted by zuul777 One way:If your soundcard supports it, have a WAV recorder recording while the MIDI is playing back. Then save it as a WAV file. Then use a converter to convert a WAV file to MP3. I use Creative Digital Audio Center, which came with my sound blaster live platinum soundcard. Do you know if the stock Soundblaster Live supports this function? And how exactly did you record the MIDI file? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members zuul777 Posted July 28, 2002 Members Share Posted July 28, 2002 I used cakewalk pro audio 9. any version of cakewalk should do the trick though...either connect a synthesizer to the keyboard via MIDI cable, or click the notes onto the staff in the program. you can record up to 16 simultaniusly playing MIDI tracks, and adjust the sound patch for each....theres usually 128 sounds on a regular soundcard...mine had extras. Do you know if the stock Soundblaster Live supports this function? Im pretty sure all the Live! models by SB support it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members WattsUrizen Posted July 29, 2002 Members Share Posted July 29, 2002 Originally posted by zuul777 I used cakewalk pro audio 9. any version of cakewalk should do the trick though...either connect a synthesizer to the keyboard via MIDI cable, or click the notes onto the staff in the program. you can record up to 16 simultaniusly playing MIDI tracks, and adjust the sound patch for each....theres usually 128 sounds on a regular soundcard...mine had extras. Sorry, I didn't really make myself clear... What I meant was, how exactly did you record the MIDI as an MP3? With a mic, or what? I have Cakewalk Pro Audio 8, so that should be fine there... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members zuul777 Posted July 29, 2002 Members Share Posted July 29, 2002 did your sound card come with the creative mixer software?if it did, set the recording source to 'what you hear'.then open a recording program like sound recorder or Sound Forge. Hit record in that program, then hit play on cakewalk. it just records whatever is playing back in cakewalk as audio.then you save that as a WAV file, and use a conversion program to convert it to mp3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members WattsUrizen Posted July 30, 2002 Members Share Posted July 30, 2002 Yup I got it all sorted out Thanks a lot for that. I've been wanting to convert MIDI to WAV/MP3 for a while. Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.