too focused on loops?

i dont mean so much its cheating. loads of songs work well with just using loops

i mean when i come to make a beat i feel like ive cheated myself out of actually composing something, having some fun with it

it just doesnt interest me much to find a 2 bar loop and stick some drums and bass on it
but each to their own

I think the whole point is why use loops when you can play them live... Rock band style to me is pretty cool, but sometimes when you're doing that AraabMuzik stuff it feels too much like a one man band when we ALL know that we should be sharing our music. This is kind of the main reason why I got my MPC, because I like to compose and do everything for my own beats, make my own samples, make my own sounds, and make my own motivation.

If I think a beat sounds better playing it live, then I will record it while I play live, but this is not always true. Sometimes, it takes a little bit of playing the game to get what you want out of it. You cannot always say that playing everything live is good. It's just that when you sequence, sometimes it just makes the beat sound too robotic.

What I tend to do, unlike those who will sequence a certain part of the beat that will play most of the beat, I think in my head, what would be the best option for me to choose in order to utilize my sounds' potential best. What I mean by that is, when I have a beat that I know I can edit, rearrange and all that afterwards, then I won't need to play it live.

aggle wrote:i dont mean so much its cheating. loads of songs work well with just using loops

i mean when i come to make a beat i feel like ive cheated myself out of actually composing something, having some fun with it

it just doesnt interest me much to find a 2 bar loop and stick some drums and bass on it
but each to their own

Pure troof right here.

Everybody has their own desires and their own style. I just feel like with this medium you have a chance to bring something to life from the dead--be it a popular song on vinyl, a great track that's "stuck" in it's greatness, or some B-side jam on a 45 that nobody ever really paid attention to. You get to lay your hands on it and hopefully make it your own. If I were to loop and lay something over it, it doesn't feel like it's mine. I feel like I did a "remix" whether than creating an original composition in a collage-like style (props to Edan for making a significant 'collage' connection).

Experiment. Maybe take something you like and mangle it until it no longer resembles what you originally liked about it. Then maybe you can dig on what YOU did with an element, not what you added on top of the elements.

I don't mean to sound bashing in any way, it's just something I've always thought about and aggle's posts inspired me to rant off. I just think of it like this:

Max Ernst?


or Vincent Gallo*


*Vincent Gallo is dope amongst other things, especially when he's not trying to be a self-aware arty brat dickhead

Talking about collage, check the "Varitations" podcast, it provides a historical "overview of appropriative collage in music", from early transcribed music via modernists to DJ's, plunderphonics, hip hop, remix-/ mash up culture. Should be of general interest for samplists.

http://rwm.macba.cat/en/variations_tag

if the loop is perfect use the loop otherwise chop and flip the samples in a new way.


i think ud be more productive laying down drums first. then find a sample u like and just lay it over the drums

Never be afraid to experiment man. Use loops, chop loops, essentially it all ends up becoming a loop in the end anyway. But if you use loops, make sure its an odd or rare record. Something people dont recognize off the back. Which ever makes your workflow flawless stick with it

m:t:c wrote:Don't think if something is cheating or not... do exactly what the track requires and you feel is taking it to the right direction.

If loop works as is, don't touch it. if it need variation, chop it.

do you man, do what feels right yourself.


and if you think pauls boutique is sample heavy, peep dj shadows work, sometimes i swear he samples over 100 tracks in each joint.

see this one from the Unkle collab

http://www.whosampled.com/producer/DJ%20Shadow/?sp=9

3 pages of samples on the Intro. WTF!!

peeping tom wrote:

m:t:c wrote:Don't think if something is cheating or not... do exactly what the track requires and you feel is taking it to the right direction.

If loop works as is, don't touch it. if it need variation, chop it.

do you man, do what feels right yourself.


and if you think pauls boutique is sample heavy, peep dj shadows work, sometimes i swear he samples over 100 tracks in each joint.

see this one from the Unkle collab

http://www.whosampled.com/producer/DJ%20Shadow/?sp=9

3 pages of samples on the Intro. WTF!!

i think thats when it get self indulgent and they care more about the technical aspects then the over all end product.


thats a nerds mind like i see dude bragging about how many changes they got or how many instruments they got or the number of tracks.

that aint the point

jpeg wrote:i think ud be more productive laying down drums first. then find a sample u like and just lay it over the drums

To each his own I find the opposite to be true, loop a sample and then bang out some drums over it. You can get some crazy dope swing going, and you make drum patterns you'd never normally make. The cool thing is, afterward if you delete the sample you got this awesome swinging drum pattern left you can do whatever you want with.

Nothing wrong with your way, just giving my two cents.

Yes both way have their pro and cons. Starting with the drums focus you on the sound of the drums so they can stand alone and still sound dope. Starting with the loop you can add the drums into the feel/groove of the loop and it sound more "played together".
There is no better way IMO. It depends on the actual track. For example: If the drums won't play alone at any point in a track the sound can be more "glued to the loop" than outstanding.

peace

too focused on loops?

Ouch, sorry, I'm guilty!

jpeg wrote:

peeping tom wrote:

m:t:c wrote:Don't think if something is cheating or not... do exactly what the track requires and you feel is taking it to the right direction.

If loop works as is, don't touch it. if it need variation, chop it.

do you man, do what feels right yourself.


and if you think pauls boutique is sample heavy, peep dj shadows work, sometimes i swear he samples over 100 tracks in each joint.

see this one from the Unkle collab

http://www.whosampled.com/producer/DJ%20Shadow/?sp=9

3 pages of samples on the Intro. WTF!!

i think thats when it get self indulgent and they care more about the technical aspects then the over all end product.


thats a nerds mind like i see dude bragging about how many changes they got or how many instruments they got or the number of tracks.

that aint the point

****, really, you read what i said above and somehow got that out of it?

I was purely mentioning the diff ways people work. some people sample 100 records for one track, some use one loop.

you guys were getting all horny over pauls boutique, when in fact there are several other records that have taken that sampling method way above and beyond what it originally was for people like pete rock ETC.


"i think thats when it get self indulgent and they care more about the technical aspects then the over all end product."

DID I REALLY SAY I CARED MORE ABOUT THE TECH THAN END PRODUCT? OR WAS A MERELY STATING A FACT ??

LEARN TO READ lady's private parts

yeah im saying some peeps that put 100 records on one track is self indulgent cos times u dont need 100 sounds to maek a good song

look at dre

drums

bass

main loop

counter melody

bridge

so the beat 8 to 16 tracks is typically enuff

jpeg wrote:yeah im saying some peeps that put 100 records on one track is self indulgent cos times u dont need 100 sounds to maek a good song

I don't think it's a crime to want to push your music and technique further.... If every track shadow made was like that then that's one thing. But I'd personally rather have someone experimenting then a formula.

I know your not advocating either way, I just wanted to point out that you cant categorize things like that. I'd personally give more merrit to someone that tried something and failed then someone doing the same thing and is scared to move forward.

Chill out though Tom. No need for name calling.

m56p87 wrote:

jpeg wrote:yeah im saying some peeps that put 100 records on one track is self indulgent cos times u dont need 100 sounds to maek a good song

I don't think it's a crime to want to push your music and technique further.... If every track shadow made was like that then that's one thing. But I'd personally rather have someone experimenting then a formula.

I know your not advocating either way, I just wanted to point out that you cant categorize things like that. I'd personally give more merrit to someone that tried something and failed then someone doing the same thing and is scared to move forward.

Chill out though Tom. No need for name calling.

cool i do see ur point,

but buttom line is the music

i dont equate technicalitiy with creativity

u can be technically profient and and still make generic boring elevator music


that was the point, i aint mad at dudes lil outburts