Jump to content

Vito Corleone

Members
  • Content Count

    85,182
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    585

Everything posted by Vito Corleone

  1. Haha! Yes that was it! So simple now that I know it. One of those things where I couldn’t get past hearing my own count and then once the drums came in I couldn’t turn it around. And then it bears no relation to what the vocalist is doing. It was driving me crazy. Thanks!
  2. This may sound lame but I could actually use some help on this: my band has been asked to do Rascal Flatts’ “My Wish” for a wedding this weekend. And this is one we get asked to play from time to time and have done it before. But I have never been able to figure the counting for the piano riff at the beginning. It sounds like it is in one place and then turns around once the kick drum starts. But I still can’t get it. Sounds to me like they used a loop and purposely tried to make it sound f’d up. Anyone have a clue where the “one” is on the piano riff? Lol.
  3. Pretty sure it's him playing on the first couple of albums. As time went on he got busy with touring and producing other acts. He was cranking out those TJB records with a pretty simple formula at that point. Just get it done quick and easy was probably the attitude, I'm sure.
  4. I was just recently listening to “Kind of Blue” for probably the 7th millionth time and one of the reasons this album never gets old to me is the way it was recorded and sounds. Another 3-track masterpiece. I don’t know how they mic’d things up for this one but the soundstage is fabulous. That they could create so much space and depth with the recording is a work of art. Using the 30th St studio didn’t hurt either. Lol. That room, an old church, was crazy good. This is another recording where there is a “surround” version available that spreads the 3 tracks across the front. On this one they did a trick where they played the album back in a studio and placed two mics in the back of the room and used that to create ambient sound for the rear speakers. You don’t really anything coming out of them specifically, but it is just enough to give you more of a feeling of being in the studio with the band. Too bad 30th St is no longer around so they could have done it there. But I personally like the result.
  5. Oh that’s true. We like what we are conditioned (grew up with) to like. That’s not necessarily a bad thing. That’s just human nature.
  6. Yeah, but our ears have our brain to process what we hear. A phenomenal listening apparatus we are born with!
  7. I do think it must be a “less is more” thing. I think that even by the 70s, a lot of these recordings were starting to lose that “magic”. Too much processing gear to play with? Too many tracks and various micing techniques? Three Mics and the Truth.
  8. Yeah, I’m not really talking about modern compression techniques. That’s kind of obvious why recordings done that way sound bad. I’m just blown away by how they got such a great sound out of a full orchestra with only 3 mics.
  9. It doesn’t mention if they used one or not, but it sounds great. Yes. Sounds like I’m right in the middle of it. Yes. The performances and arrangements for sure. I do like orchestral performances from this period. More “pastoral”? Can’t think of a better word. I hate using words to try and describe music. But the recording is superb. The room, too, will have a lot to do with it of course. But the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium? Who knew! Lol.
  10. I don’t want to make this a digital vs analog debate—although maybe that’s part of it—and I definitely don’t want to discuss modern “brickwalled” recordings and masterings— but I’m so often amazed by how much better recorded older stuff seems to be. Right now I’m listening to this 1959 recording of Violin Concertos by Jascha Heifetz recorded and released by RCA’s “Living Stereo” series. These were recorded on 3 track tape with just 3 mics placed in the studio. The liner notes say it was probably done using Neumann U47 and M49/50 microphones. This particular release is 3-track with the original 3 tracks spread across the 3 front speakers. It sounds just amazing. Like I’m in the studio. So much warmth and depth and presence. How did they do it so much better back then with older gear?
  11. 137th annual convention?? Who knew they had audio conventions in 1877?
  12. Been using a pair for years in my home studio. Love 'em! Probably no better set of cans for the price.
  13. [ATTACH=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-attachmentid":"32561816","data-size":"thumb"}[/ATTACH]
  14. So how hard should it have been for the defense to show those things aren’t copyrightable? It shouldn’t even be about music, per se. If a certain element of something isn’t protected under the law, it shouldn’t matter whether that element is a guitar riff or a pattern on a piece of cloth.
  15. Yes. And that testimony should include why the copyright was infringed. You really shouldn’t have to know anything about music to figure that out. If the defense wasn’t able to convince the jury that a simple drum beat isn’t infringement under the law, then they probably had bigger problems than no musicians on the jury.
  16. I don’t know that anyone with a fundamental knowledge should t be excluded. But you don’t want “experts” on the subject either. If you and I are both selected for the jury and if we come in with differing opinions on what should or shouldn’t be a copyrighted piece of music, then our bias should exclude us.
  17. I get the thinking the jury should have some musical knowledge to better understand these cases. But the flip side of that is having jurors with preconceived notions of what should constitute a protected piece of music. The are supposed to not have much knowledge and only rely on the testimony of the witnesses. It is the job of the lawyers to present testimony and evidence that explains this stuff to them.
  18. I can understand the logic behind that. As jurors, you're supposed to judge the case only on what is presented in court. Not on what the juror believe he/she may personally 'know' better than the witnesses. If you have such training and experience that could influence the jury, then you should probably be called as a witness, not be a member of the jury.
  19. Yes. That's what we were talking about. Hey...wasn't it you who started the thread a couple of weeks ago about the ruling that said only what's on sheet music is 'protected'? At least for older songs? Can you look that up again. I'd be interested to contrast that ruling to this one. Maybe the difference was that only applied to songs that were copyrighted prior to the timeframe where you could submit a recording for copyright
  20. I don't believe that is the case here. I haven't listened to the clip, but reading the article it doesn't appear that they used a sample (which would be a no brainer for infringement) and their defense was that what they used was too short to be considered stealing anything. If it's just a simple drum pattern? Hard to see how you can say that anyone 'owns' it. But if it is unique enough, I could see the argument. I haven't heard the beat in question to know.
  21. wasn't there a thread about a recent decision that seemed to pull that back and ruled that only what was on the published sheet music (i.e. lyrics and melody) was protected? Although I have to admit to being a bit confused because it sounded to me as if people here (including you) were not in favor of that ruling. I'll have to try to find that thread. It was just a couple of weeks ago, IIRC. Copyrighting a 'beat' is a tough call. Does Brian May own the 'beat' to "We Will Rock You"? Hard to argue that anyone using that beat these days wouldn't owe him a cut. Crazy thing is that pop songs these days all seem to have half-a-dozen or more people with songwriting credits. What's the big deal to tack on a couple of more to Katy's song? Although apparently the song sold/downloaded something like 13 million copies. Probably adds up to a nice little chunk of change.
×
×
  • Create New...