OT: Whatever, man.

[droolmaster0]

But that's not correct, as you know. I have no problem with the 'C' word. I do have objections with your particular misappropriation of it.

 

 

You know, you still haven't addressed the OP, Drool... I really think you crossed over the line here. you have absolutely nothing to contribute to this thread, other than calling people names. Character assassination much? It's not even my thread, btw. You're just going ballistic at the "C" word...

 

[ChristianRock]

But that's not correct, as you know. I have no problem with the 'C' word. I do have objections with your particular misappropriation of it.

 

Well then the C word is ChristianRock

 

Have a good weekend, man.

[droolmaster0]

Well then the C word is ChristianRock Have a good weekend, man.

 

Your mouth says 'yes, yes, yes' but your avatar says 'no, no, no'

[mcdowella]

 

Now that's simply false. I am allowed to comment factually on false statements made here....has religious music had a huge influence on noise music, for instance? Or essentially any style of 20th century timbral based electronic music? I suppose that the classic comeback is that these aren't music....

 

 

I did not think of timbral based electronic music or noise music, and am not an expert in them. If you, speaking as an expert, inform me that they have grown up isolated from other music, all I could do is use Google and Wikipedia to see if any of their leading figures (whose names I do not know) or any of their fans have had exposure to classical music or religious music training and wonder about this. I might also wonder what might be born by bringing in the ideas of polyphony and choral music to a form of music developed entirely without them.

 

Hidebound as I no doubt am, when I think of the theory behind electronic music, I think of Wendy Carlos's "Secrets of Synthesis", where she suggests that sythesizer music make use of traditional forms of orchestration such as note doubling and hocketing. I can't tell from Wikipedia where hocketing started, but it was certainly used by composers working for Notre Dame (France, that is :-)). Any form of polyphony, of course, will take you to Bach and Fux, both of whom earned their bread by writing religious music.

 

(Wikipedia quote)

Stockhausen's conception of opera was based significantly on ceremony and ritual, with influence from the Japanese Noh theatre (Stockhausen, Conen, and Hennlich 1989, 282), as well as Judeo-Christian and Vedic traditions (Bruno 1999, 134).

[soundwave106]

But what you're doing is still musical acompaniment to a church service, so you don't want to get wrapped up in technological gew-gaws, especially if it might be distracting to some of the older folks who aren't familiar with electronic music production. Anything using, say, preprogrammed beats would probably reek of hotdoggery.

 

Well, no, preprogrammed beats are probably fine, but you probably do want to keep the production more upbeat and light. Skinny Puppy style electronics are probably not appropriate for most churches. But there's a lot of synthpop that's fairly light-hearted. That's at least my guess of what will work, the people closer to the church audiences might have a better idea.

[Leonard_Hatred]

 

And why is worship music "crap"?

 

 

Not wishing to fuel the flames but....

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VPcPCwK_G0

[droolmaster0]

Your argument seems to be that simply because religious music has existed in the world, therefore if any music came into being in the world it therefore must be influenced by it, and someone would have to prove the negative in order to convince you. That's usually not the way it works. You made a claim and you can't back it up. By saying that x has influenced y, we generally mean more than that people who do y have heard of x - we mean that there there is a direct influence somehow on y. That's for you to show.

 

 

I did not think of timbral based electronic music or noise music, and am not an expert in them. If you, speaking as an expert, inform me that they have grown up isolated from other music, all I could do is use Google and Wikipedia to see if any of their leading figures (whose names I do not know) or any of their fans have had exposure to classical music or religious music training and wonder about this. I might also wonder what might be born by bringing in the ideas of polyphony and choral music to a form of music developed entirely without them. Hidebound as I no doubt am, when I think of the theory behind electronic music, I think of Wendy Carlos's "Secrets of Synthesis", where she suggests that sythesizer music make use of traditional forms of orchestration such as note doubling and hocketing. I can't tell from Wikipedia where hocketing started, but it was certainly used by composers working for Notre Dame (France, that is :-)). Any form of polyphony, of course, will take you to Bach and Fux, both of whom earned their bread by writing religious music. (Wikipedia quote) Stockhausen's conception of opera was based significantly on ceremony and ritual, with influence from the Japanese Noh theatre (Stockhausen, Conen, and Hennlich 1989, 282), as well as Judeo-Christian and Vedic traditions (Bruno 1999, 134).

 

[ChristianRock]

Not wishing to fuel the flames but.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VPcPCwK_G0

 

That was funny. So I guess we do have our own version of Rico Suave

[Purity_Control]

That was funny. So I guess we do have our own version of Rico Suave

 

That middle one has to be an ex-gay

 

That was totally excruciating

[SpaceNorman]

I said what I said rather carefully. What you imply about what I said bears little relation to what I actually said.

 

Who gives a {censored}?

[Cygnus64]

 

Now that's simply false. I am allowed to comment factually on false statements made here....has religious music had a huge influence on noise music, for instance? Or essentially any style of 20th century timbral based electronic music? .

 

 

Ummm, good sir,

 

the grandaddy of em all, the one album that is responsible for all of us being in this forum, was a synth version of music of one of the biggest Christian composers of all time.

 

Switched on Bach

[Gus Lozada]

 

Ummm, good sir, the grandaddy of em all, the one album that is responsible for all of us being in this forum, was a synth version of music of one of the biggest Christian composers of all time. Switched on Bach

 

 

Amen.

 

* Pun intended.

[Unfed]

Ummm, good sir, the grandaddy of em all, the one album that is responsible for all of us being in this forum, was a synth version of music of one of the biggest Christian composers of all time. Switched on Bach

 

ummm, no sir. people really give far too much credit to this album, and it sure as hell isn't the reason that i'm here. it's also not the only reason this forum is here.

 

Drool - i'm with you on this 'argument', but please let it go. it's just not worth it.

 

...see you in hell.

[Atticus Plink]

ummm, no sir. people really give far too much credit to this album, and it sure as hell isn't the reason that i'm here. it's also not the only reason this forum is here.

 

 

I don't think it's any part of the reason for this forum. Carlos was trying to mimic the sounds of an orchestra, hardly what I call a lover of electronic tones.

[seamonkey]

 

ummm, no sir. people really give far too much credit to this album.

 

I usually find when someone makes a comment like this, they are not from the era in which this was released. Having lived through that era, I can tell you it was revolutionary.

First, modular synthesis was in it's early stages and through it's use on this album, exposed millions of people(and musicians) to the potential of analog synthesis.

Secondly, a musician dared take on the classical establishment by taking the sacred music of Bach, by using what was then dubbed as "electronic music".

 

Unlike many musicians of today, who have tools at hand to ease the recording/writing process, Wendy Carlos tediously performed numerous overdubs on an 8 track recorder. When you hear a chord, it was recorded note by note with overdubs.

 

Regardless of one's generation, I think if you consider the groundbreaking use of new technology(modular synthesis), production, creativity, and the tedious recording process, one will come to the conclusion this album is far from over-rated.

But, as in all things, you are welcome to your opinion, and I'm not trying to be confrontational towards yours, only to offer mine, and why I think it is not over-rated.

[mcdowella]

In "Secrets of Synthesis" Carlos states that mimicing existing sounds is a pointless exercise - EXCEPT that it is good training for the job of recreating whatever sound you have in your head and want to produce. She does admit to recreating the sound of the bagpipe in "Pompous Circumstances", and she re-creates a xylophone in Secrets of Synthesis as a demonstrating of the flexibility of the new GS Digital Synthesizer. She starts off Secrets of Synthesis by demonstrating that the range of tones available to the original Moog is actually quite limited, and describes how she overcomes this by using envelopes and LFOs - and of course traditional orchestration. She later says that the digital synthesizers are an advance partly because they can generate and control detuned partials, and thereby avoid sounding like a modified organ. So I think the original Switched On Bach could not be an attempt at mimicry because mimicry wasn't really possible. Her enthusiasm is for creating new sounds by combining features of traditional instruments in ways that don't happen in nature - one example I can remember is bowed tympani.

 

My introduction to synthesis was hearing Switched on Bach and short snippets from the BBC Radiophonic Workshop (e.g. Doctor Who theme).

[asynchro_nous]

Speaking about Bach and contemporary Christian music in the same breath, as if they have a thing to do with each other, is completely laughable.

 

But that's not really the point of this thread, or the one that this one sprouted from.

 

So, whatever, man.

[Purity_Control]

Secrets of Synthesis is Carlos's views cira, um, 1990? Not necessarily the ones she had when she started making SOB around 25 years earlier.

 

The mimicry argument is true unless you actually like the sound of a synth trying and not entirely succeeding to mimick an actual instrument.

 

The philosophy stuff is all very well but SOB 2000 still sounds like ass to me.

[Bernard]

Music is something that we perceive. It is something we can create. It can be observed in nature (birds singing, pulsating light effects of marine life that could be converted into audio signals) The Human body has electromagnetic fields and other pulse like effects (brain heart). The earth has a constant hum (the combined discharge of electrical storms creates a sound that can be measured) wind and lighting discharge create sound. The Universe all the way down to the behaviour of atoms (Brownian motion in air) can create rhythm and sonic movement if tapped correctly. The human voice.

 

Electronic Music, the most obvious thing that led to Forums such as this will have come about in early static discharge experiments and around the time of the discovery of electricity... Mankind will have played music with anything that can create sound.

 

Mechanical music is much earlier and close to the birth of mankind (that led to Piano's etc)

 

Early forms of recording (predating tape and vinyl) are by definition sampling.

 

Between the age of 3 and 16 I experimented with coils, transformers, relays, transistors (and other discrete components). A solenoid can create interesting and musical sounds without the need for a speaker as it is really a speaker without a conventional cone. Had I been more musical at that age and had no electronic instruments existed, it would have been very easy to go the next step and create an instrument. I had a CDS photo cell D beam long before Roland made one.

 

Religion was not required.

 

Why is it an issue for some, because their Religion, their personal belief system is based on the creation theory. Therefore to a Religious person it is all connected to their belief.

 

It is beyond the scope of this forum to discuss any further. Best left like a genie in a bottle me thinks

 

[Cygnus64]

 

Speaking about Bach and contemporary Christian music in the same breath, as if they have a thing to do with each other, is completely laughable.

 

 

The only thing laughable is your myopic and EXTREMELY limited knowledge of music history. Bach was a contemporary Christian worship service kinda guy, it was his day gig. He wrote the other stuff on the side. There's a chain in every single aspect of music to the past.

 

 

 

I usually find when someone makes a comment like this, they are not from the era in which this was released. Having lived through that era, I can tell you it was revolutionary. First, modular synthesis was in it's early stages and through it's use on this album, exposed millions of people(and musicians) to the potential of analog synthesis. Secondly, a musician dared take on the classical establishment by taking the sacred music of Bach, by using what was then dubbed as "electronic music".

 

 

Correct. It's not the music, it was the development and acceptance of the synthesizer. It's easy to say "I don't like the album" etc, it has nothing to do with that. Rest assured: it influenced someone who influenced YOU. Switched-on Bach transcended everything: classical geeks and hippie stoners could listen to the same album. It was THE turning point of synthesis. The number of people who eventually bought a mini-moog because of hearing that album a few years earlier is very high.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switched-On_Bach#Influence

Suddenly Moog's company found itself inundated with requests from record producers for Moog systems, and a rash of synthesizer albums were released to capitalise on the popularity of the new sound.

[Cygnus64]

I don't think it's any part of the reason for this forum. Carlos was trying to mimic the sounds of an orchestra, hardly what I call a lover of electronic tones.

 

I can only assume that you've never heard the album, because you couldn't be further from reality.

[pogo97]

 

I usually find when someone makes a comment like this, they are not from the era in which this was released. Having lived through that era, I can tell you it was revolutionary.

 

 

Lived through it. Didn't much care about it then, or now really. Not to denigrate the album but it wasn't earth-shattering in my little world.

[keybdwizrd]

 

Switched on Bach

 

 

From Wikipedia:

 

"Switched-On Bach was one of the first classical albums to sell 500,000 copies, and go platinum (Van Cliburn's recording of Tchaikovsky's Piano Concerto No. 1 went triple-platinum in 1958). Entering Billboard's pop Top 40 charts on March 1, 1969, it climbed quickly to the Top 10; it stayed in the Top 40 for 17 weeks,[1] and in the Top 200 for more than a year. In the 1970 Grammy Awards, the album took three prizes: Best Classical Album, Best Classical Performance

[Bernard]

Linking this Forum to the commercial success of a record or album is technically incorrect.

 

As I understand it, this Forum is linked to Music Equipment Sales (please correct me if I am wrong ). Without which it would not be funded.

 

Music is purchased by those that can not make their own or who just enjoy buying the music of others. Some people just listen to the radio or watch the equivalents to modern MTV's or create their own. Sales success is more linked to opportunity, timing in the market place, marketing and basic musical and production competence (in the past this really needed record company support and a deep wallet for some gear). To give any one piece anything much beyond that is just hocus pocus...

 

A women throwing a kitten into a bin can clock up loads of Internet hits, does not make the act good... it is just the masses rushing to see or hear something... numbers are no biggy. Don't let numbers go to your head...

 

It is what we perceive that matters and what drives us to be interested in KSS...

 

 

 

''Musician's Friend is a music retailer based in Medford, Oregon, United States founded in 1983. The company stocks a range of musical instruments, equipment, and music technology including guitars, basses, amplifiers, keyboards, live sound and recording equipment, drums, percussion, DJ equipment, and band and orchestra instruments.''

[droolmaster0]

Well, first of all, I appreciate that you can run off alternate versions of history in your head, so that you know (I personally don't) that if this album had not been released, electronic music wouldn't currently exist in anything like the form it does now.

 

Secondly - the point that I was arguing against was that ALL genres of music have been influenced by religious music. To claim that because the first electronic music album was an album of music by Bach, and so therefore all genres (whether it be hip hop, noise, or whatever) have been influenced musically by religious music just really doesn't hold together.

 

 

Ummm, good sir, the grandaddy of em all, the one album that is responsible for all of us being in this forum, was a synth version of music of one of the biggest Christian composers of all time. Switched on Bach