Grime-where did it all go wrong?

[petergunn]

Half-time tracks. "what" was cool as a contrast to a lot of the faster stuff like "golly gosh" and "stomp" that was being played, but once half-time or that plodding sort of sound became the norm rather than the exception, everything got really boring, in my opinion.

i actually think the half-time stuff now, like Strangleman by Jammer and Gangsterz by Wiley, is great, b/c it mixes well w/ dubstep (and some of it almost sounds like dubstep)... time to close that gap... some of the more hip hop imitation stuff can get a little tired, tho...

 

[petergunn]

And, although this is another debate, remixing people's vocals and producing things they don't like with them is IMO lame. I think it's very important to reach a consensus between vocalist and producer on what riddim to voice. Otherwise whatever you do will always be peripheral, secondary at best and parasitic at worst.

Having come through a few different dance related scenes the 'let's take a hiphop/reggae accapella and sprinkle some bits over it over our tune to make it sound more street' really, really annoys me. Finding a common ground between producer and vocalist is the way that innovation, change, new ideas happen ORGANICALLY, not because someone downloaded an accapella and put it over their 'crazy' new beat. And quality wise there is no substitute for having a vocalist fit themselves into your track. If you pay attention you will hear, even in rapped vocals, shifts of pitch and tone that match the beat/music. If people don't want to spit on your tracks it's because your not inspiring them. If you DO manage to inspire them they will spit fire on your track, if you come with something that is merely adequate, the flows you get will be of the same quality.

i find this a little ridiculous, it's like a painter saying a collage artists' work isn't art...

personally, i love it when producers and vocalists work together, that is to say the artist has input on the beat and the producer has input on the vocals, things rarely work that way these days (but it is the best way to work!)

like if an artist gets a cd of beats (that are completely done, all the changes already set, and were made without him in mind) and creates an original vocal track for it (and this is how like 95% of hip hop tracks are made these days), why can't it work the other way around? why can't a producer take a vocal track (that is completely done, already set, and made w/o him in mind) and make an original music track for it? what's the difference?

also, remixes and blends have a huge history in hip hop... so the idea of it being "parasitic" is kinda ridiculous... (actually the idea of any sort of remix being "parasitic" in the 21st century is totally looney... is sampling "parasitic"????? at this point in history, we are at open season on ideas and whoever does it best wins, namecalling about it is sour grapes. yes, the constant blogging/hipster bandwagon jumping is ridiculous/stupid, but it can't be stopped and what's important is if the music is good... if it sounds good in the club, that's more important to me than if it's "authentic") listening to old Tony Touch tapes and shit like that, the best part was the blends... and think of all the great remixes that were done with the vocals recorded for a totally different backing track... like the Pete Rock remix of "Shut 'em down" by P.E... or even the Black Sheep "choice is yours" (the album version is kinda dull!) or ultramagnetic "papa large" (east coast remix by the beatminerz)

also, quite frankly, vocalists can sometimes be a bitch to work with and sometimes not the most open minded about new ideas... like i've heard alot of great breakcore remixes of hip hop stuff that i don't think the original artists would have approved of in a million years... if they heard it, they'd probably think it was a bunch of crazy bullshit (and the people they sampled to make their own records probably thought the same about the hip hop records), but i think it sounds great on both ends... it grounds the breakcore and weirds up the hip hop...

basically i'm saying, don't dismiss the idea of remixes and blends b/c they're just a different part of creativity than making original tracks...

 

[SIZZLE]

Thanks to all weighing in, checking back after a weekend net hiatus.

peter: if you read my post as saying 'all remixes are parasitic' that's not what I intended to say. I am speaking more about re-contextualizing people's vocals without their permission or knowledge. The example you used of breakcore is more what I'm talking about. If you know me you'll know I have a very mixed and ambivalent relationship to this scene. I just think the whole accapella jacking thing is a cheap, easy and not particularly interesting or ambitious direction for things. If you're a DJ doing accapella mixing live, that's cool, or even making your own mashups for soundman use that's basically cool, but selling records that are built largely around someone else's stolen accapella is just... blech. Especially with breakcore and dancehall, I just wish someone would do the work to find some vocalists and record them. It would add a lot more depth and interest to that music. Maybe I'm just applying my aesthetic prejudices here but if I have to hear another fucking distorted amen record with some baited up, rinsed out capleton sample from 10 years ago on it someone is going to get choked out.

And I also think saying that sampling is not parasitic is a bit willfully ignorant. I'm not saying that it's indefensibly wicked and evil but saying that sampling is NOT some form of theft is pretty blind. As far as your question about the difference between a vocalist spitting to a pre-made beat well.. he knows he's doing it, I'd say that's a difference. The process of choosing a beat is an artistic act, taking that away from the artist is a loss. As a producer and DJ I have done all of the things being discussed here and I'm not saying that no one should ever do them again, what I'm saying is that this relationship and situation is not something to aspire to or commend. Do what you have to do, but if your building your own work by stealing from others know your self, don't pretend it's all love.

I suppose you and I will differ in that you feel 'if it sounds good in the club it justifies itself'. As a producer I am not satisfied to stop there, and to paraphrase Jean Luc Godard, the best criticism of one tune is another.

 

[elgato]

It seems to me that this argument is a matter of degree rather than absolutes. The value which I personally attribute to music which / musicians who sample and recontextualise the music of others depends greatly on the manner in which it is done. For example I dont hold much value in a tune which jacks a whole accapella and just lays it over a mashed up amen, but I do hold other, more sophisticated exercises in recontextualising in much much higher regard. The most obvious example for me, in discussion of use of accapellas, is Stone Cold by Groove Chronicles. Not only is the reinterpretation technically masterful and innovative, and the cutting and phrasing just straight up pleasing and exciting, its execution brings completely new dimensions to the interpretation of the vocal... as Simon Reynolds said, with the incision and style few can replicate...

"The original song's mood is totally subverted: what had been a devotional paean becomes a baleful ballad of sexual dependency, with Aaliyah digitally dis-integrated into a multitracked wraith of herself, stranded in a locked groove of desolated desire."

 

[SIZZLE]

I think elgato is on the money here. I'd like to point out that I'm not saying people should stop doing mashups, bootlegs, and OF COURSE not legal remixes however I think people should not only do this and be satisfied. Bootlegs are a useful way to build a riddim and quickly test how it will work with vox in a club, and of course in a club bootlegs are an easy way to get a big reload because everyone recognizes it.

To re-state my point in less negative terms, I wish more breakcore, dubstep, weirdness, insert genre here producers would make the effort to meet and record vocalists. As someone who does it, I can tell you, it's hard, frustrating, demoralizing, time consuming, etc. You will find yourself frequently outside of your comfort zone, creatively and otherwise. However, when you can find an MC who can spit and who will go sick over one of your 'weird' riddims it's very rewarding. I mentioned laziness earlier and that is one of the reasons I don't rate all the mashuppers. It's easy to steal, hard to create something new. Those who take the time and energy to make original tunes WITH the consent of the artist, you have my respect.

And referring to earlier thoughts about evolution etc, I am always much more excited to learn a new 'crazy' vocal tune I just heard was NOT a mashup because it suggests the possibility of further tunes from those people.

 

[viktorvaughn]

And I also think saying that sampling is not parasitic is a bit willfully ignorant. I'm not saying that it's indefensibly wicked and evil but saying that sampling is NOT some form of theft is pretty blind. As far as your question about the difference between a vocalist spitting to a pre-made beat well.. he knows he's doing it, I'd say that's a difference. The process of choosing a beat is an artistic act, taking that away from the artist is a loss. As a producer and DJ I have done all of the things being discussed here and I'm not saying that no one should ever do them again, what I'm saying is that this relationship and situation is not something to aspire to or commend. Do what you have to do, but if your building your own work by stealing from others know your self, don't pretend it's all love.

I suppose you and I will differ in that you feel 'if it sounds good in the club it justifies itself'. As a producer I am not satisfied to stop there, and to paraphrase Jean Luc Godard, the best criticism of one tune is another.

I think perhaps describing all sampling as theft doesnt do the process justice. It can at times be cheap, lazy and sonically rubbish process. But at its best sampling can be a wonderful homage, a giving of respect back to the last few generations. I suppose im thinking of hiphops sampling of funk. jazz and soul here really and the claim 'you can't dig Def Jam if you havent heard Blue Note' or something like that. This helps build up cross-genre ties and relationships. And there is something really exciting about hearing a little 5second unit of sound or whatever resignified in a totally fresh new direction, with it playing a part nothing like what it did in the original tune.

It can also be brilliantly versatile, with people sampling each other as a means of mockery, taking something and redrecting it in a wholly different direction.

 

[Ned]

What I hate is stuff like (random, stupid example) 'Jump Around' by House of Pain where they just get one bar of a funk track and loop it, unaltered. In cases like that it feels like hip hop is almost a process of dumbing-down for lazy dancers - the original funk track, with its solos and variation and progression, is apparently too complicated, so they drill it into you with repetition.

 

[joe.]

Hi

mostly re: what sizzle's saying

I reckon some breakcore type sampling is somehow sort of aspiring to a contextless music, using elements that are supposed to be identified as 'black' while the artist who makes it somehow sidesteps such categorisations and tries to construct a sort of neutrality.

It's not always the case but I know people who make breakcore and you ask them 'what was that dancehall rhythm you had in that track?' and they don't even know what your'e talking about. It feels like a wilful ignorance of the original context, like sizzle says a denial that sampling is some sort of theft.

But i don't think seeing sampling as related to theft neccesarily makes it a bad thing, it just forces an acknowledgement of music as a social process. I think to move on from this its important to think that the one musical process that gets called 'sampling' can be tangled in a million different context dependent social processes.

I guess actually working with artists atleast forces some reflection on these social processes that sampling makes it possible to deny.

 

[SIZZLE]

Also, my initial post was about sampling vocals and doing mash ups. An example that just occurred to me, since we're on breakcore. Shy FX - Original Nuttah, by all accounts a classic, I don't think I've ever heard anyone playing it without a big reaction. Compare this to (tries to think of a bad record, fails) the hundreds of records built out of a couple break loops and a sample of someone saying 'Lighta!' or 'Pull Up!' and you'll start to get what I'm thinking.

 

[mms]

You could at a stretch see neo ragga jungle's thievery of dancehall vocals as an extension of dancehalls own magpie like atttitude to other musics, especially american r and b, melody lines, riddims all sorts are reappropriated, it's own history is rejigged as older riddims are revived etc, it's one of the elements that make it fascinating and populist.

i do overall agree with the idea that nicking a capelton vocal and sticking it over a quashed break is pretty lame, but then a large part of any genre will be a bit wack. All props to the bug and bong ra for actually engaging with singers and mcs.


Also i don't think that breakcore is a dead end genre, its been going about 12 years and and has developed in loads of ways with lots of engaging elements and merits, the whole ragga junglish thing is a little dead end though, but i think that's separate from breakcore in some ways, it just shares some elements.

As far as hiphop sampling loops, there are some amazing records which are just based on loops and the loop from jump around is pretty incredible. But i do think the sampling thing got rinsed out by nyc mid 90's hiphop, Premier etc... not many hip hop records are sample loop based nowdays, it's more or less r and b that has taken over from that.

 

[kid murkle]

murkle

Don't no1 here spit... where can man drop barz

 

[Slothrop]

peter: if you read my post as saying 'all remixes are parasitic' that's not what I intended to say. I am speaking more about re-contextualizing people's vocals without their permission or knowledge.

Doesn't that cover most of ardkore, and the pitched up RnB tunes that turned into garage, though? I'm all in favour of people recording vocals properly, and obviously there are millions of dreadful tracks based around nicking an acappella, but there's also a long history of great stuff too.

 

[hint]

What I hate is stuff like (random, stupid example) 'Jump Around' by House of Pain where they just get one bar of a funk track and loop it, unaltered. In cases like that it feels like hip hop is almost a process of dumbing-down for lazy dancers - the original funk track, with its solos and variation and progression, is apparently too complicated, so they drill it into you with repetition.

That's the best thing about hip hop!

Whether it be a straight 2 bar sample, or chopped samples, or built from scratch... it's all about repetition. The vocals are the part that should replace the solos, variation and progression.

 

[cooper]

re: distribution, rossi b is running cb distribution now - http://cb-distribution.com/ - they reliably get the big grime and dubstep tunes. me, megatron, subtek have been picking out some things for amoeba sf.

but am i still into grime myself? maybe. not sure. i find a lot of that energy in hyphy now, particularly since i live in sf.

 

[Logan Sama]

Hyphy doesn't have the energy in the beats though I find.

 

[petergunn]

Hyphy doesn't have the energy in the beats though I find.

well, the tempo is like 40 beats per minute slower than grime, but i would say for midtempo hip hop, it has PLENTY of energy

 

[gumdrops]

seriously, does anyone really think grime used to all be brilliant? even on those old legendary nasty show radio rips, a lot of the MCing is diabolically bad, half the time its just ridiculous shouting and clipped spurts that mean nothing and sound horrendously amateur, and a lot of the beats even back then were quite poor as well. yeah, of course there were people who stood out, and tracks that were brilliant, but the distance from the cream of the crop to well, the crop, has always been quite a big gulf from what i can tell. and i dont think thats changed. a lot has changed in terms of the sound of the beats, but i dont necessarily think the apparent merger with the dubstep sound is a bad thing. in some ways, i prefer this 'grimestep' sound of the beats - theyre dark and bassy like dubstep but not so clinical or industrial. it does seem that not too many new MCs have are that special but theres always been a huge glut of substandard hanger ons all trying to spit their terrible lyrics. the problem now is im not sure whos really setting the standard. jme and skepta might be the top boys but both have stilted styles that i dont think are going to be great influences.

i dont think grime is dead -listen to a newham gens show, its still great and exciting, the energys still there, its just different. just cos it hasnt had top ten success doesnt mean its failed. more problematic for me is a lot of new vocal tracks seem to be making too good a go of all the hype that grime is the uks real hip hop cos thats what they sound like, and i really dont want to hear that from anyone whos meant to be 'grime'. but i suppose it was inevitable really that thats what it would mutate into. the mcs want to be artists and do concerts, not raves, but the problem is they dont really have the songs to back it up, theyre still better at hour long radio sets than individual tracks. which would be fine if people wanted to pay for that, but im not sure they do.

 

[DJL]

I agree the more 'grimestep' tracks have the most energy at the moment. When I first got into grime seriously (around when forward riddim came out) I always thought it would mutate into what dubstep seems to be heading towards at the moment. Back then at the raves you would hear 4x4 beats and 8 bar tunes along with recorded MC tracks like Oi etc plus live MCs in one set. Since then the more popular grime has drifted towards a hip hop template with tracks, probably because there are no raves?

 

[gumdrops]

so funky house has killed grime? or is about to any day now for sure? i wonder if funky house totally takes over london (has it done it already? i dont know as i have no radio anymore), what will happen to the MCs? will london produce its version of ghetto tech or something? it was inevitable really, the ridiculously dark-at-all-costs, cartoon OTT anger etc etc was never going to last forever, and while yeah, i do hear grime reasonably often from kids annoying mp3 players, it never really took off in london en masse did it? either this is cos london just didnt BELIEVE it, or cos they didnt wanna hear all that aggression in 2005/2006, theyd rather hear an escape from it. either way i dont see it as a bad thing that something more club/dance friendly has found favour again. grime never wanted to be club music, despite everyone saying 'why are there no raves', it wanted to have concerts and stage shows, it was trying to get away from the club vibe...

 

[bun-u]

it never really took off in london en masse did it? ...

No it didn't ...and here lies the flaw in the argument that it has passed or is dead. In terms of London, grime is pretty much the same size now as it always was – it has never been the sound of London or even black or urban London – never dominated the pirates, clubs, record shops etc. It’s this peculiar external hype for grime which has died.

Funky house by the way is pretty much old skool 4/4 garage – again something which has never really gone away but now it’s been re-badged and presented as something new. I don’t see a big switch taking place (a la jungle to garage 10 year ago – the context is very different now).

I’m loathe to sound like one of those jungle guys in the late 90s banging one about it coming back again, but I think musically its been a good year for grime.