Funky/London/UK House

[Corpsey]

I think my preference for tinkering vs over-production is that the first doesn't exclude people who don't know any synth programming skills and can find something useable out of the box and make music with it. I think there's a lot of people who have a natural talent for music who are put off by the often quite steep learning curve whereas that learning curve often seems quite attractive to producers who don't have the musical talent yet can turn out perfect mixdowns of cliched ideas. I often find the most interesting ideas often come from people that don't realise what they're supposed to do musically - I've heard people tapping out more interesting riddims on tables than I hear in a lot of tunes recently.

Think there's a lot of people in electronic music that should really be either musician or engineer but not both. I'd probably make plenty more music if I didn't find mixdowns such a lengthy and dull process, but some people seem to love it.

There's probably a connection between genres becoming stale/self-regarding and the mixdown/technical-prowess level being raised - in dubstep, for example, there's obviously more people than ever before trying to make it, but for the most part its only the people with extensive technical knowledge (i.e. GEEKAZOIDS) who can compete... whereas in a genre in which low-fi production levels aren't a problem, anyone can have a go, which means (perhaps) that there's more chance of original ideas breaking through...

It's more complicated than that, but I'm sure that has something to do with it.

 

[Pestario]

There's probably a connection between genres becoming stale/self-regarding and the mixdown/technical-prowess level being raised - in dubstep, for example, there's obviously more people than ever before trying to make it, but for the most part its only the people with extensive technical knowledge (i.e. GEEKAZOIDS) who can compete... whereas in a genre in which low-fi production levels aren't a problem, anyone can have a go, which means (perhaps) that there's more chance of original ideas breaking through...

It's more complicated than that, but I'm sure that has something to do with it.

I agree. Also this:

(i.e. GEEKAZOIDS)

made me lol in the office

 

[sodiumnightlife]

Also, with the genre being new, there's more acceptance of rough edges. Early benga isn't exactly well engineered, and neither was pulse x. Both dubstep and grime are older now though, and so there's more expectation vis a vis production levels.

 

[Pestario]

Plus I think that while this lo-fi production value window of opportunity is open, a lot of dormant bedroom producers get working again until the engineering wankery takes over and alienates the Fruityloops demographic and suppresses alot of grassroots creativity.

 

[sodiumnightlife]

I know that i've been trying to make a few bits and pieces and enjoying it a lot more than i've been for any other genre for a while.

 

[Shonx]

I do think that with the geekazoid, the mode of transport is more important than the journey. Truly they are the Clarksons of the music world and should be destroyed.

This may be slightly too harsh, I can't quite decide.

It is quite odd with this lofi aesthetic though, I think most of this has been to do more with not generally having audiophile (speaker fondling perverts)!!! equipment most of my life, but also to do wit the fact that unless something's recorded really badly it's not that detrimental to my enjoyment of a tune, whereas someone's clear polished mix will add pretty much nothing positive to my ears.

Shit tapes, squat rigs, deaf engineers. Should see off most of the sound ponces

 

[faustus]

DJ MAK 10 FUNKY HOUSE VOLUME 2. 16/09/08
http://www.sendspace.com/file/93l5mx

 

[Grievous Angel]

rolex sweep remix.

it's a lot.

 

[doom]

It's more complicated than that, but I'm sure that has something to do with it.

Nah, I rekon you got it about right. Not to say that people with hi tech skills don't also have something musical to contribute, its just people that get OCD about mixdowns n that often lose sight of the music. Its also really easy for people to 'hide' behind 'science' & get away with average tunes, whereas a crap piece of music made with presets/raw production is really, really obvious.

Spyro + Marcus Nasty ft Badness and Griminal - 13th September

Cos the link on the Rinse blog leads to no-wheres!!!

 

[Blackdown]

i think to assume there's one definitive answer in the production v ideas dynamic is a mistake.

i personally would always pick ideas/emotion over mixdowns, and yes bad mixdowns (hold tight burial, musical mob, early dexplicit...) can have a great, raw aethetic of their own.

but mostly a decent mixdown makes a track better, especially in club based music, as long as the mixdown is always secondary to the intent of ideas/emotion of the track.

 

[Shonx]

i think to assume there's one definitive answer in the production v ideas dynamic is a mistake.

Sweeping generalisations do make for an intensified debate though don't they

 

[Blackdown]

...but not neccesarily ultimately a more accurate one...

 

[straight]

Nah, I rekon you got it about right. Not to say that people with hi tech skills don't also have something musical to contribute, its just people that get OCD about mixdowns n that often lose sight of the music. Its also really easy for people to 'hide' behind 'science' & get away with average tunes, whereas a crap piece of music made with presets/raw production is really, really obvious.
QUOTE]

this has become really evident in a lot of dubstep as rats flee the sinking ships of student d&b and instrumental hip hop. My girlfriend put on a ninja tune sampler that came with plan b the other night and other than than the bug and roots manuva it was nearly all well engineered tunes with plodding 3 note riffs that would make a 17 year old skream blush. That may say more about ninja tunes A&R though.

I think peoples romanticizing over the production quality has more to do with how they listen to the music. Most people are either listening to podcasts or pirate radio and the lack of dynamics is much less apparent. I imagine if a lot of these tunes were heard alongside refined productions in a club situation on a function 1 the lack of balanced frequencies would afffect thephysicality of the music. i know this from my own experience of doing a load of gigs in smaller clubs, as soon as i made the jump to big systems it showed up exactly what my music was lacking in punch on the floor and pretty much had to go back to the drawing board and learn to fix things in the mixdown. its not boffin stuff, just a bit of housekeeping and it makes al the difference.

Is there anyone spotter enough to have tracklists for the marcus/mac10? shows are they mostly exclusives? I recognise a lot of the big tunes but it'd be great to know what the hell im talking about

 

[elgato]

i think to assume there's one definitive answer in the production v ideas dynamic is a mistake.

this i agree with definitely. i don't even think that binary is appropriate... skilled production can give rise to amazing textural ideas etc

i personally would always pick ideas/emotion over mixdowns, and yes bad mixdowns (hold tight burial, musical mob, early dexplicit...) can have a great, raw aethetic of their own.

to think out loud though, for a while i have found myself almost taking issue with mixdown value being related in these terms... i am maybe being a bit over the top but i find the idea that there is an objective (and objectively verifiable) goal to music production uncomfortable, even if it is just one aspect of it

cos as you point out, 'bad' mixdowns produce textures and responses that could never be achieved by 'good' mixdowns. so then i can't help but wonder, why should they be referred to as bad?

not at all meaning to beef, hope that thats clear, just thinking out loud

 

[Pestario]

cos as you point out, 'bad' mixdowns produce textures and responses that could never be achieved by 'good' mixdowns. so then i can't help but wonder, why should they be referred to as bad?

'Bad' in a technical, sound engineering sense I guess. Lots of noise or distortion getting in the way of a clean, technical reproduction of sound. But this is under the presumption that that is what you want which, of course, is not always the case.

 

[Blackdown]

yeah, the sense of their being an objective in mixdowns has the underlying assumption that we're talking about club music i guess, where the objective is often impact. mixdowns help here because parts, when not mixed, do cancel each other out in a track and without proper separation can lose all impact in a club.

those same characteristics (ie a "bad" mixdown) can of course be used to make an aesthetic, if need be, but it might just be one that works better on headphones.

in addition i think we should mention mastering here too. decent mastering helps no end, as anyone who's tried to play their mixed, unmastered cd out and found it 10 times less loud than the previous track...

as an side, i think there is a point to be made about some of the crit of mixdowns and soundsytems. it's easy to play the "audiophile: alert!" card ("look at my £5,000 B&O stereo, just listen to how good my Bon Jovi CDs sound in Dolby 5.1!"), but good mixdowns - taking the basic proviso that they're ultimately not more important than the ideas/emotion of the music - do have value, in terms of how well a track can fullfull it's potential.

similarly good soundsystems are a joy. it's all well and good sitting behind a pc theorising about the post modern significance of music being propogated on mobile phones, but in practice i'd really rather prefer hear a loefah beat over the DMZ system than my nokia, thanks. it's easy to throw critical mud at the "you had to be there man" sentiment, but if you were there, it does sound better than your headphones... obviously!

and the other thing about good mixdowns and mastering is the protect your ears. high end noise, often caused by clipping in unmixed tracks or distorting soundsystems, damages your ears more than low end. no one wants to go deaf!

 

[elgato]

'Bad' in a technical, sound engineering sense I guess. Lots of noise or distortion getting in the way of a clean, technical reproduction of sound. But this is under the presumption that that is what you want which, of course, is not always the case.

exactly... i guess i am just unhappy that there is what seems to me to be such a conservative assumption sitting behind the language which is common in dance music.

edit hadnt seen Blackdown's post yet

 

[Corpsey]

The anti-presets thing - is this a consequence of presets sounding shit generally or a case of being original/having your own 'sound'? Was just kicking a wretched little theory around the moth-ball-belching corridors of my brain-block... the search for originality in music originally revolving around how sounds are used, before originality becomes about WHICH sounds are used... and then it short-circuited and I started wondering if farts dream.

 

[elgato]

yeah, the sense of their being an objective in mixdowns has the underlying assumption that we're talking about club music i guess, where the objective is often impact. mixdowns help here because parts, when not mixed, do cancel each other out in a track and without proper separation can lose all impact in a club.

those same characteristics (ie a "bad" mixdown) can of course be used to make an aesthetic, if need be, but it might just be one that works better on headphones.

in addition i think we should mention mastering here too. decent mastering helps no end, as anyone who's tried to play their mixed, unmastered cd out and found it 10 times less loud than the previous track...

as an side, i think there is a point to be made about some of the crit of mixdowns and soundsytems. it's easy to play the "audiophile: alert!" card ("look at my £5,000 B&O stereo, just listen to how good my Bon Jovi CDs sound in Dolby 5.1!"), but good mixdowns - taking the basic proviso that they're ultimately not more important than the ideas/emotion of the music - do have value, in terms of how well a track can fullfull it's potential.

similarly good soundsystems are a joy. it's all well and good sitting behind a pc theorising about the post modern significance of music being propogated on mobile phones, but in practice i'd really rather prefer hear a loefah beat over the DMZ system than my nokia, thanks. it's easy to throw critical mud at the "you had to be there man" sentiment, but if you were there, it does sound better than your headphones... obviously!

and the other thing about good mixdowns and mastering is the protect your ears. high end noise, often caused by clipping in unmixed tracks or distorting soundsystems, damages your ears more than low end. no one wants to go deaf!

i definitely feel a lot of what you are saying, and half (maybe more than half!) tends towards a lot the perspectives in that post. but i can’t help but feel that prescriptive rules about how sounds should fit in relation to one another surely can’t be good for dance music’s potential.

for me there is no denying the joy of good sound through a good system. but i guess what i am saying connects to thoughts i have been having about how comfortable i want to be with something like dance music, and whether im happy for it just to be enjoyable rather than something different to that. it is all to do with paradigms too i guess, because there obviously is also something very radical about music completely subjugated to physicality and as immersive as that can be, but its just that i have been to hundreds of clubs now where i have had that, so i find myself wanting something different (something, for example, that i am finding with Zomby’s new stuff, or in the other direction, Todd Edwards).

 

[Blackdown]

i definitely feel a lot of what you are saying, and half (maybe more than half!) tends towards a lot the perspectives in that post. but i can’t help but feel that prescriptive rules about how sounds should fit in relation to one another surely can’t be good for dance music’s potential.

Prescriptive rules are obviously bad, especially in an artistic context, but it's definitely the case that in a sonic engineering case there's a bunch of stuff you can rely on to enhance your track sonically (as long as you want it to go down a certain route, ie club/impact).