where has the quailty gone?

[Adverse]

... just spent the last 20 minutes searching records.. 8 out 10 records sound like utter crap. and i don't mean the production, i mean the quality. a perfect examples is the new arkus p on highball or the mark williams on ignoma or the klotzberg on collapse... jesus some of these are trainwrecks.

the new toneman althought not my style is a great contrast with the sounds really tight... adam jay's new default (also not really my bag) was also very well engineered. but i'm saying.. seems to me all the labels or artists aren't putting the effort into there cuts as possible.. maybe i'm dense but i think it's missing.

this is definitely where i agree with death on a stick from the wittekind post(concerning his/their music).. the quality has washed away.

especially in hard techno.. the quality ante needs to be raised.

[DJZeMig_L]

here here...

But I would add that the more we produce/ dj the more demanding we get as well mate..
I have always had probs buying records... so this isn't a new prob. 4 me... not that the quality isn't up 2 this or that but because not many r really up my alley!!

Z

[Sunil]

... just spent the last 20 minutes searching records.. 8 out 10 records sound like utter crap. and i don't mean the production, i mean the quality. a perfect examples is the new arkus p on highball or the mark williams on ignoma or the klotzberg on collapse... jesus some of these are trainwrecks.

the new toneman althought not my style is a great contrast with the sounds really tight... adam jay's new default (also not really my bag) was also very well engineered. but i'm saying.. seems to me all the labels or artists aren't putting the effort into there cuts as possible.. maybe i'm dense but i think it's missing.

this is definitely where i agree with death on a stick from the wittekind post(concerning his/their music).. the quality has washed away.

especially in hard techno.. the quality ante needs to be raised.

Ingoma etc. I agree, a waste of time. Don't have any Wittekind material yet, Amok though is ****in' rocking, end of story, no need to get "Oh its generic" about it, it's not pretending to be anything only hard as ****, I love the Amok EP on Kne'deep, it's quality hard techno

[Adverse]

did i say anything about being generic or even the content of said songs? no. read the bloody thread next time... if buttman is gets on your nerves, you sure get on mine.

[Sam_Horam]

... just spent the last 20 minutes searching records.. 8 out 10 records sound like utter crap. and i don't mean the production, i mean the quality. a perfect examples is the new arkus p on highball or the mark williams on ignoma or the klotzberg on collapse... jesus some of these are trainwrecks.

the new toneman althought not my style is a great contrast with the sounds really tight... adam jay's new default (also not really my bag) was also very well engineered. but i'm saying.. seems to me all the labels or artists aren't putting the effort into there cuts as possible.. maybe i'm dense but i think it's missing.

this is definitely where i agree with death on a stick from the wittekind post(concerning his/their music).. the quality has washed away.

especially in hard techno.. the quality ante needs to be raised.

2nd track on the a side of Ingoma 13 is superb... don't know if you checked it but have a listen.

[MARKEG]

?????? mark

what the ????

don't understand why you wrote what you wrote.

[Sunil]

did i say anything about being generic or even the content of said songs? no. read the bloody thread next time... if buttman is gets on your nerves, you sure get on mine.

Well you did refer to the Wittekind thread, and I gave my opinion in reference to that, never actually said that you said it was generic, just giving my tuppence on the thread *you* ressurrected, you can switch out of defensive mode now Adverse.

Personally I think your initial post could have been better written. Although I think I know what you are saying you aren't making it very clear.

[Jimfish]

i have to agree - far too many records sound piss poor, but this is not a problem with the cut - its bad mixes in the first place.

I know a couple of people whos mixes are below average and they are constantly blaming the sound of thier records on thier mastering engineer.. wrong!

[Sunil]

2nd track on the a side of Ingoma 13 is superb... don't know if you checked it but have a listen.

Actually someone said that to me alright about there being a really good one on it, which kind of surprised me! I just think Ingoma have gone into overkill with the tribal loop, by releasing far too much of the same thing, they've had a new 12" nearly every month I'd say, and the music's become too predictable. I will check this new one though..

[TripleX]

when i go out to get some new records, i´ll for example listen to 50 records, and i will only like about five to ten....
so it´s quite normal for me...but i don´t think there´s a lack of quality, i just think I got a weird taste :lol:

[Sam_Horam]

2nd track on the a side of Ingoma 13 is superb... don't know if you checked it but have a listen.

Actually someone said that to me alright about there being a really good one on it, which kind of surprised me! I just think Ingoma have gone into overkill with the tribal loop, by releasing far too much of the same thing, they've had a new 12" nearly every month I'd say, and the music's become too predictable. I will check this new one though..

I also thought that the a side of no. 12 by our very own Mr. Mac was brilliant. One of my favourite tracks this year.

I agree that some of them haven't been too strong but the last two (12 + 13) and the next one are all good.

[Adverse]

2 people have actually replied in regard to what i was actually writing about. this is silly. quailty of sound! not content!

[miles]

2nd track on the a side of Ingoma 13 is superb... don't know if you checked it but have a listen.

Actually someone said that to me alright about there being a really good one on it, which kind of surprised me! I just think Ingoma have gone into overkill with the tribal loop, by releasing far too much of the same thing, they've had a new 12" nearly every month I'd say, and the music's become too predictable. I will check this new one though..

Don't bother mate, same old stuff.
I think the bongo phase has had it's day.
People are actually making a bit more effort instead of sampling
a dodgy drum loop and releasing it about 10 times :wink:
Have a look on the dark experimental forum for something a bit more interesting.

[davethedrummer]

hey adverse
chill out a bit mate. people are just giving their opinions.
it was a little unclear what you were driving at in your original argument.
i think the overall quality sonically and conceptually is getting lower in techno all the time but it's a sign of the times you just don't make no money at it unless you just do it all the time and constantly release stuff.
sometimes things will get a little samey but it's a new record for the dj's to play and even if it's only a little different to the last one it's better than nothing.
but essentially i have to agree then the sound quality in general has been a little poor of late.

[Sunil]

2 people have actually replied in regard to what i was actually writing about. this is silly. quailty of sound! not content!

I agree in the quality of sound part lacking in some records, but hell the quality of records in general has come on an awful lot to say, 10 years ago. Maybe an average hard techno track doesn't sound as polished as something on Kanzleramt , but it's not that big a deal is it? If it's a good tune, it's a good tune. An amazing record should rise above whatever reservations we may have about the sound quality.

It's all subjective anyway, I think the quality on many Theo Parrish house records are awful, really faint levels and kickdrum which sounds too loud...yet a fan of his would really dig it for the fact that it sounds rough and ready, the same applies to many techno records too. I'd say 8 out of 10 of techno releases that I hear are fine in the sound quality department, not vica versa.

[Adverse]

hey adverse
chill out a bit mate. people are just giving their opinions.
it was a little unclear what you were driving at in your original argument.
i think the overall quality sonically and conceptually is getting lower in techno all the time but it's a sign of the times you just don't make no money at it unless you just do it all the time and constantly release stuff.
sometimes things will get a little samey but it's a new record for the dj's to play and even if it's only a little different to the last one it's better than nothing.
but essentially i have to agree then the sound quality in general has been a little poor of late.

'8 out 10 records sound like utter crap. and i don't mean the production, i mean the quality.'

i don't know how i could have been clearer henry.

[DJAmok]

A lot of the stuff from Germany has lower quality, cuz we can´t afford vinyl mastering. Hardtechno is not a biog market, and when you´re selling around 1000 copies, 300 Euro for Vinyl mastering is very expensive.

Arkus P. and Wittekind have very good sound quality on mp3 but the stuff gets pressed as is from wav to Vinyl. :cry:

[technosnob]

Adverse, I feel your pain....When I started playing records way back in the 80's you expected that the "audio quality" may suffer from record to record. And it did.(cheap ananlog gear vs. expensive analog gear)
Nowadays with all the digital equipment, where audio will never see an analog audio cable you would expect that "audio quality" would be better. And in whole I believe that most records do sound a lot better.

But yes it does break my nut when you play a record with a high recording standard. Then you try to mix it with something that sounded like it came from my ass. (you haven' seen my ass. It's not pretty)

But such is life, my sad ass and all.

[Sunil]

Adverse, I feel your pain

Yes indeed! Life is tough :)

[Sam_Horam]

I now understand what you mean Adverse but you weren't very clear mate...

Anyway when you said you were scanning records were you listening to the vinyl thru a decent system or what???

That's the only way to judge how it sounds....

Some tracks sound ok thru headphones/in a shop but are absolute beasts on a decent system.

[Sam_Horam]

Anyways...

The quality is always varying...depends on so much stuff...I don't think you can say there is a definite trend towards bad sounding stuff...

Give us some specific examples....

[Adverse]

Anyways...

The quality is always varying...depends on so much stuff...I don't think you can say there is a definite trend towards bad sounding stuff...

Give us some specific examples....

i mean it's not like i didn't in the first post or anything.

[Dustin Zahn]

I understood you the first time, Adverse. :)

I agree totally. Its because a lot of these older producers are too lazy to do any research on producing better masters of their music. These new producers coming up don't know a damn thing about music at all most of the time, therefore they can't master to save their soul. Its amazing how the sound quality has come on some records, but at the same time theres a lot of shit.

it's a shame too cause I'm sure we've all got records with really great tracks but they're mastered so piss-poor it ruins a lot of the fun. I think it also crosses with that one post someone stated about draining the life out of samples by over-EQing them to get away with using the sample.

No matter what the reason is...it's great that people can produce tracks easily now, but they need to work on their mastering.

[Clarkus]

I'm just starting to produce tracks and as you well know there's alot to take in. You can't just get it perfect straight away. If you could that would be great :D. But you don't, you make some mistakes along the way and learn from them! :wink:

Some of us are still learnin'!!

[Jimfish]

Mastering is one thing but really its all in the MIX tho.

[zap]

i agree with clarkus we have to get or tracks out there learn from our mistakes and progres from that after all we can,t be perfect from day one so just get your shit out there and lets make techno biger and better

[Si the Sigh]

Curvepusher = Quality

[Adverse]

Mastering is one thing but really its all in the MIX tho.

mhmmm it is.

[Jimfish]

you know this

[Angrymann]

I agree on both points . The first point which Adverse made about the SOUND of the records. Some of them really are bad and like someone else posted you don't really notice until you are trying to mix it with a well produced crisp record , you've sometimes got no ****ing chance of making the mix decent without redlining or whatever ( and that just adds to the shite sound , more distorrtion etc etc).

The quality of actual tunes is a lot worse than even two years ago. Ingoma is a very very good example of this , I bought a couple at the start and thought "these are nice background building beats in here, I could use this....nice". But if you check all the releases there are very few differences regardless of who produced the track (Mark Williams , Ben Sims,Vincent Davis, Jorge (Paul Mac) Zammecona) , which to me shows that it's a case of loop sharing amongst mates, four different people should never come up with the same sound unless they are USING the same sounds, it's a ****ing impossibility.

Like, I think Dave said , it's due to having to make money to keep the labels going that people release so many , but I personally get very suspicious of labels that have releases out all the time , it's not possible to maintain quality with that sort of output. Examples : Drumcode (rubbish now , simple as that , how many Henrik B 76 beyer remixes can we have that sound exactly the same), Primate ( too much nonsense vocally shit on them now).

This won't change until there is a new wave of ideas that grab peoples imaginiation , that have enough good points to make the tunes really good but not too much so that you get bored with the concept straightaway. Viscious circle really!!

[Patrick DSP]

I'll be more than happy to offer my mastering services to anyone that asks...

I've had many compliments from lawrie (according to chris lib) and many other pressing plants in the uk and germany about my abilities.

-Patrick DSP
icq: 68377933

[Angrymann]

There you go then lads, someone that can master and blow his own trumpet too !!!! ( only kidding)

[Patrick DSP]

it's a talent.

:P

[Dustin Zahn]

I doubt the material on big club labels has a positive correlation with the sound. You may not be a big Adam Beyer or Henrik B fan, but their sound quality isn't exactly terrible.

[Adverse]

i agree 100%

these guys have their shit down to a t.

[YouKnowILoveYou]

My shit is 'well produced' out of my arse,
does that make it good?

I can't understand how people interchange and confuse musickal inspiration & quality with production quality.

????

[Jimfish]

nobody is confusing anything..

this thread is about PRODUCTION QUALITY! and that alone

[YouKnowILoveYou]

nobody is confusing anything..

this thread is about PRODUCTION QUALITY! and that alone

My point exactly, you are confused. Check the first post of this thread-


... just spent the last 20 minutes searching records.. 8 out 10 records sound like utter crap. and i don't mean the production, i mean the quality.

[herman]

I agree on both points . The first point which Adverse made about the SOUND of the records. Some of them really are bad and like someone else posted you don't really notice until you are trying to mix it with a well produced crisp record , you've sometimes got no **** chance of making the mix decent without redlining or whatever ( and that just adds to the shite sound , more distorrtion etc etc).

The quality of actual tunes is a lot worse than even two years ago. Ingoma is a very very good example of this , I bought a couple at the start and thought "these are nice background building beats in here, I could use this....nice". But if you check all the releases there are very few differences regardless of who produced the track (Mark Williams , Ben Sims,Vincent Davis, Jorge (Paul Mac) Zammecona) , which to me shows that it's a case of loop sharing amongst mates, four different people should never come up with the same sound unless they are USING the same sounds, it's a **** impossibility.

Like, I think Dave said , it's due to having to make money to keep the labels going that people release so many , but I personally get very suspicious of labels that have releases out all the time , it's not possible to maintain quality with that sort of output. Examples : Drumcode (rubbish now , simple as that , how many Henrik B 76 beyer remixes can we have that sound exactly the same), Primate ( too much nonsense vocally shit on them now).

This won't change until there is a new wave of ideas that grab peoples imaginiation , that have enough good points to make the tunes really good but not too much so that you get bored with the concept straightaway. Viscious circle really!!


not really into directly answering post's about my own stuff everyone is entitled to there opinion and all that but to suggest that some of us swap drum or any other kind of sound to make tracks for the same label truly is laughable if there are similarity's in the tracks it's probably more to do with the fact it's a tribal label than anything else.

[Adverse]

herman!

i want to hear your opinion on the topic! do you have one? RE: quality..

and mark's too?... he left some weird comment when i started the thread that i didn't really understand.

[Dustin Zahn]

I'm out the loop here...herman=who? on ingoma...

[crime]

I think I can see where all the confusion has arisen......

and i don't mean the production, i mean the quality.
What do you mean by the "Quality", this could mean any number of things, if it's not the productions, then its either the sequences, Drum Programming, sounds, effects, or ideas in general
So how come everyone is going on about the mastering? I have a DJ rush record on Highball and the mastering is fine, I very much doubt they get any other releases they put out cut elsewhere.. BTW ALL trax are mastered when the Laquer is cut, you don't have to get it done yourself before you send your trax to the label


a perfect examples is the new arkus p on highball or the mark williams on ignoma or the klotzberg on collapse... jesus some of these are trainwrecks.
By this it seems like you are implying that the idea are at fault (Forgive me if i'm wrong).. would you call something that was mastered badly a "Trainwreck".. I thought the term was more aptly used in reference to bad DJ mixes




this is definitely where i agree with death on a stick from the wittekind post(concerning his/their music).. the quality has washed away...

especially in hard techno.. the quality ante needs to be raised.
The reference to the above thread is a dead giveaway, Adverse I think you posted this and got scared at everyone's reaction and got a bit confused... I personally think fair play to anyone who wants to voice their opinion, just people are always gonna like what they're gonna like.. Personally, I'm not interested in this swedish sound, or the hard techno thing, not to say I don't like hard stuff, I just like stuff that's got some changing elements, and I can completely get with what you and angryman are trying to say, I've heard a lot of records that sound very simelar, and I mean to the point before where some friends picked up some records (No names mentioned) and it actually sounded like 5 copies of the exact same record, just with different labels on, which can't be healthy for the scene.... having said that, if you're really into that kind of thing, no disrespect, I just can't get with what I'm not into.... [/quote]

[Adverse]

i mean the track sounds like arse meaning that the samples that are used are not well produced or "sampled" or even clean maybe over distorted, mixing is ****ed or not eq'd right they just trash through the mix like train. have you ever tried to mix a track with all it force in the high freqs. good god.

the reason i used that other thread as reference is cause that where my train of thought started.. some tracks really show that some guys who are getting released just don't care or bother to learn proper mixing. this topic has nothing to do with sound or style. strictly studio business.

[YouKnowILoveYou]

I think I can see where all the confusion has arisen......

and i don't mean the production, i mean the quality.
What do you mean by the "Quality", this could mean any number of things, if it's not the productions, then its either the sequences, Drum Programming, sounds, effects, or ideas in general
So how come everyone is going on about the mastering?

I totally agree with you Mr Crime, that's what my-

"My shit is 'well produced' out of my arse,
does that make it good?"

post was getting at.

[Dustin Zahn]

Whoever says you don't need to mastering tracks before you send them out because they are mastered later is full of shit. In some cases, The Exchange or whoever will make them sound thick on vinyl, but if your track sounds like ass before they master it, 99% of the time its still going to sound like ass after they master it for the vinyl.

I don't think you understand what mastering plants such as The Exchange or Curvepusher really do.

[MARKEG]

yeah for me it's very important that you do drastic mastering changes from your end and then let ppl such as curvepusher add that final sheen ontop. at the end on the day, you don't pay the cutting place to drastically change your sound into something it wasn't meant to be!!!

it may be of interest but once i sent a blackout release to a specialist mastering place first before the cut. when i phoned up lawrie he said it was awful. he really had to work to get it right. apparently most mastering places don't understand the difference between cutting to vinyl and cutting to cd. the stupid ass had widened the whole stereo field.

[Jimfish]

doh!
i am confused

[davethedrummer]

shit in
shit out
that's the old saying
and very true it is to.
there are many things that contribute to a "good" sounding record.
fristly you have to look at it from the dj's point of view:
it needs to be:

loud / bright / punchy / warm bass / clear tops / easy to mix (sonically)/ good definition.

from the producers point of view it needs to be:
tight (very inportant as you can't mix a sloppy track) punchy / well balanced / interesting (sonically and in the arrangement) / groundbreaking ???!!!!???

basically , look at these things .
it's really difficult writing music,. o.k. you don't have to be a genius to use a computer but you still have to have the ideas to make the track and then you have to mix the thing. a lot of us are amateurs (really) and we learnt what we know by trial and error. sometimes things sound great other times they don't. it's just the way it goes when you are a composer/dj/engineer.

my point is
nirvana didn't mix "smells like teen spirit" did they ? the beatles didn"t mix "all you need is love" ?
they were mixed by other guys who specialised in just mixing and engineering tracks ,and here we are thinking that because it's all computer based that we can do it all.
well sorry but it just don't work like that.
and that's the fun of it. some guy making some track in his basement going straight from his mind to yours
o.k. the quality may not be michael jackson but it's directly from him to you and that's what techno is about ( for me)
if you ask me i would say it's the advent of fully computerised studios and a non understanding of analogue mixing that's contributed to dodgy sounding records.

i really hope you get my meaning in this post

[wenna]

fully computerised studio??

i think a combination of hardware and software creates the best quality tracks. and the hardware polishes it off!

[davethedrummer]

erm
wenna did you really lock this post?
anyway what i meant by
fully computerised studios
was guys who maybe haven't had the experience of using analogue equiptment and just do everything on computers /ie : acid ; logic : cubase etc.........
and would maybe benefit from getting to grips with real compressors and f.x. and a real mixer.

anyway i don't get the locked post joke, sorry mate.

[wenna]

hey man,
the post locked thingy is the signature in my profile (it wasn't working last nite, cheers G-if it was u?)..

i should have read the topic really first, talking about hardware in a 'wheres the quality gone post'. what am i like? :roll:



i rekon that it's damn near impossible to make personal,innovative music with just software these days, everything has been done 1000 times before!

[crime]

Whoever says you don't need to mastering tracks before you send them out because they are mastered later is full of shit. I am full of shit then... Strange that I've put out at least 8 records that didn't have any compression on until it's cut.. if your production is good enough you shouldn't NEED to master it before you go to the cut.. then again, I'm full of shit so what do I know..



I don't think you understand what mastering plants such as The Exchange or Curvepusher really do.
I must have had my eyes shut and not been paying attention when I was at the 3 cuts I've been to :roll: I obviously don't understand...This is another point, it's generally a good idea to be at the cut, as anything wrong with the mastering they do there can be rectified easily while it's being done.... then again Dustin, what the **** do I know, I'm full of shit.....

[crime]

if you ask me i would say it's the advent of fully computerised studios and a non understanding of analogue mixing that's contributed to dodgy sounding records.

YES!

[Jimfish]

yes i agree with crime here - if the quality is good enough in the mix then the hefty mastering is not so necessary.
But on the other hand i do know a few people that the mastering process is essential to to attain thier sound.
I remain adament they could achieve such a sound in the mix though, and therefore have far more control over things.

[Jimfish]

and i know what you are saying about the computerised thingy, but i am sure that you could give paul white a crappy old pc, and any one of us a massive analogue studio, and pauls would sound the best.

I think what really is the problem is unexperienced ears are given too much too soon with all these computers and stuff - before they have really gotten thier sound tight they are punting out muddy sounding records - which is a crying shame :cry:

I personally do use analogue gear and software togethor.. for example there is no way i could afford a hardware verb that sounds as good as the waves, yet the computers filters just dont do it like my mfc42 or my eq killer - not forgetting those mackie gains and sweeps..

[crime]

I think what you use for monitoring counts for a lot too, I really notice a difference between stuff I've mixed down on headphones or Hi Fi speakers and proper studio monitors... I've mixed stuff down ins software before that has sounded really good on cheap headphones and then listened on a stereo and it's sounded shit.... simelarly, I've comapred stuff I've mixed down on Hi Fi speakers to stuff I've mixed down on my absolute zeros and really noticed the difference...remember it's the final link between the kit and your ears...

[Angrymann]

Can I just jump back to my point again . Sorry if I caused anyone offence at Ingoma that wasn't my intention , as I said I have bought some of your records so I am not going to do that if I thought they were all shite.

I don't know how you make your records at all , so I was just saying to me it sounded like you had swapped loops because they sounded so similar. So apologies for that, but to come back with the reason for it sounding very similar is because it is a "Tribal" label is a bit bollocks is it not. Just cause it's tribal doens't mean it has to be the same , you don't have to always put the same chugging beat to it , coupled with a faint african vocal or whatever , do you.

I like all the producers on that label especially Mark Williams and Paul Mac ( sheer class ) and have much respect for their work , which is why I think it's a crap excuse , you are obviously talented and know your sound so you MUST notice the similarites.

Are you just pumping out tunes until the Tribal thing has run it's course or do you plan on continuously progressing the tribal sound.

[MARKEG]

basically what i think is that as it's become easy to do techno sounding tracks on a computer, the 'quality' in general of all techno music has gone down because of an increase in the shit. now ppl can release music that sounds OK after only 6months to 1 yr of producing!!!! it takes many, many years to learn the finer arts of mixing/compression/eq/mastering as far as i'm concerned.

and also access to information about these techniques is much easier to find than back in the day when we only had sound on sound magazine - which has lead to more 'reading' and less 'experimentation'.

i remember someone coming round to our studio who was quite good but relatively new and going 'my god, you're not supposed to eq like that'. and there's the point. information overload has meant less experimentation, more conformation to the rule book of michael jackson music making and less understanding of techno as an entirely. which has meant more shit techno.

as with all good techno, throw away the rule book. the only rules we need to know as producers with techno is to fill out that frequency range and to learn how to make the cut of our record nice and loud. all the rest should be experimentation and creating our own rules.

:wink:

[Jimfish]

jeez, what is it with all the micheal jackson comments round here...
micheal jackson ****in rules!!!!!!

[herman]

Can I just jump back to my point again . Sorry if I caused anyone offence at Ingoma that wasn't my intention , as I said I have bought some of your records so I am not going to do that if I thought they were all shite.

I don't know how you make your records at all , so I was just saying to me it sounded like you had swapped loops because they sounded so similar. So apologies for that, but to come back with the reason for it sounding very similar is because it is a "Tribal" label is a bit bollocks is it not. Just cause it's tribal doens't mean it has to be the same , you don't have to always put the same chugging beat to it , coupled with a faint african vocal or whatever , do you.

I like all the producers on that label especially Mark Williams and Paul Mac ( sheer class ) and have much respect for their work , which is why I think it's a crap excuse , you are obviously talented and know your sound so you MUST notice the similarites.

Are you just pumping out tunes until the Tribal thing has run it's course or do you plan on continuously progressing the tribal sound.

ok fair point it was only the comment about swapping loops i found a little erksome anyway, like i said thats why i dont like commenting on my own stuff everyone is entitled to an opinion. ok as for the similaritys thing to be honest i think the tribal label thing holds water as a theory i mean for it to be that it has to fit into certain parameter's for it to be a tribal record. im not saying that things cant be pushed further or anything for example of the points you mentioned only marks records have an african vocal and other than tempo i really cant see how they have the same or similair beat. There is going to be some similarity's from the same producer but surely thats part of having your own sound ,i really dont think mark's /paul's / ben's /vince's whatever records on ingoma sound that similair other than the fact that they are tribal style.

as for the churning out tunes comment come on mate your back in the loop swapping territory again.

just my opinion like :wink:

[crime]

i remember someone coming round to our studio who was quite good but relatively new and going 'my god, you're not supposed to eq like that'.
That's the point where I always think "Cool" 8)

Invent your own traditions
Decode yourself
chuck that rule book in the bin, if it works it works, if it don't, forget it....

[Angrymann]

ok fair point it was only the comment about swapping loops i found a little erksome anyway, like i said thats why i dont like commenting on my own stuff everyone is entitled to an opinion. ok as for the similaritys thing to be honest i think the tribal label thing holds water as a theory i mean for it to be that it has to fit into certain parameter's for it to be a tribal record. im not saying that things cant be pushed further or anything for example of the points you mentioned only marks records have an african vocal and other than tempo i really cant see how they have the same or similair beat. There is going to be some similarity's from the same producer but surely thats part of having your own sound ,i really dont think mark's /paul's / ben's /vince's whatever records on ingoma sound that similair other than the fact that they are tribal style.

as for the churning out tunes comment come on mate your back in the loop swapping territory again.




Cheers for getting back to me. I know it sounded like I am being a bit aggressive or whatever about the whole thing , it's not a case of that at all , I was just getting your opinions. The only reason I am even bothering to give my opinion is that I pay seven quid for each record and after buying about five of them I got a bit miffed when I came to the next one and actually had to think " have I got this already" and had to ask if it was a new one in or had they just put it back out on the racks again.

If you say they are all different then who am I to say they are not. But when you make them and you notice similarites from your last one , do you not get frustrated yourself.

Do you see Tribal as just being a short term thing, beacuse if the sound and style of the music is so similar it can't last very long. Like the Siesta House explosion of a while ago , it was a fresh sound at the time but they didn't prgress it at all , so it becamse shite very quickly. They also had a massive output which to me always suggests milking a situation for all it's worth because you know it's going to be short lived.

But in the end of the day you are producing Techno so that's always good.Plus I liked the Tribal sound that why I was buying the records , but to me you have to mix it with a different style , use th tribal records almost as background to something a bit harder.

I do like to get right into the discussions about this stuff cause I am passionate about it. I don't mean to piss you off by expressing my opinon and I wasn't having backhanded swipes at you either. I think it's a lot to do with my user name and the fact that you can't detect tones of voice etc on this , if it was a face to face conversation we wouldn't have had any problems.


:wink: :wink: :)

[The Divide]

Oh oh oh, Please dont shoot me for doing this! I know all this has nothing to do with "quality" thread but i gotta add to what Angryman said...


[quote]

Do you see Tribal as just being a short term thing, beacuse if the sound and style of the music is so similar it can't last very long. Like the Siesta House explosion of a while ago , it was a fresh sound at the time but they didn't prgress it at all , so it becamse shite very quickly. They also had a massive output which to me always suggests milking a situation for all it's worth because you know it's going to be short lived.

But in the end of the day you are producing Techno so that's always good.Plus I liked the Tribal sound that why I was buying the records , but to me you have to mix it with a different style , use th tribal records almost as background to something a bit harder.



Yeah wow, good call! Thats realy how I am starting to aproach/think about things now. I can remenber when I first got into techno, it sounded so much differant to now. I havnt a clue who or what it was I was listening to then (sorry I was 16) but I think it was stuff like Beltrams ballpark things with crazy synths and a bit more minimal sounding. It sounded realy futuristic and advanced. Where as now it doesnt sound like that, well not with some of the tribal stuff. I think about this a lot. Now theres a lot of this tribal stuff about. Sampled drums like congas steel drums etc are always going to sound the same, hench people get bored. I still love that kinda sound but i do see it as a tempory thing.

Yeah it does make a background to something else. Ie if its not based on the drums its bassed on something more unique sounding, like a big "**** off" synth sound, where the tribal drums are there just to fill in the holes in the mix and give background rythm. I think if you make a track thats built soley on conga/brush drum samples (whatever) its always going to have that been there done that feeling no matter what you do with it. Its doesnt mean its bad but it would if thats all that everyone did! Conga drums will never evolve. Congas dont apeal to me as much as something like a synthesised drum sound, the sound of door slamming or a hammer hitting a radiator! shit like that. I dont see the point in using those same drum sounds over and over. Prolly conga loops are recycled a lot coz there an easy way of working. I have done it myself using conga loops off the fatboy slim audio beatz dissfusion. There so easy to chop up and change, yeah at first i found it was a working way of producing a tune but not realy satisfying. A realy mental Dj cunt i know showed me this record....

Makaton - Animal worship on a label called roadz conez.

http://www.substrata.com.au/A557D8/substrata.nsf/AlbumsByAlbum/85290924B48615B0CA256CFC0058A506

If you have this, check out the sounds they used. Its real diverse, why?? The sounds they used as drums (also the sequencing is differant). They realy made the effort to find them instead of reaching for the old conga loop folder in the fatboy slim sample cd. Its these kind of artists that are going to move things forwards its differant, its well done and it works well. Its an amazing record imo.

I was saying how it sounded futuristic, I used to think thats what techno was all about (when I wa' a lad). Not now, I think great techno doesnt have to sound that furistic. Its more about feeling, like the sounds are trying to tell you something scary and you understand and connect with it! Combine that with powerfull sounds and you got a tune I like. I hear this a lot in that Makaton record.

Yeah good one! Although kinda irrelavant.

I think theres quality (mix and content) out there now, I was out last night and I thought about this topic when i stood in the middle of the dancefloor. Yeah, theres a lot shit out and about but theres deffiantly quality out there. Things will move on, Techno always does. Give it time and let it evolve. Techno is just too ****ing good to just die off.

[davethedrummer]

yeah more synths in techno please
warm bass noises/ hard synth clanks / mettalic riffs
that sounds way more futuristic to me than a load of ols loops crashing around.
whatever happened to minimal techno anyway????
is there anything ( dancefloor orientated ) around these days????

[Jimfish]

yes, i second that, of course there is a place for everything (decent), but i do think we need more good quality large sounding synth driven stuff..
we are actually going this way with midi-sync recordings (it is what we allways wanted to do with the label anyway) after this new one it is big phat synth driven monsters all the way.. im REALLY looking forward to it too...

[davethedrummer]

yeah good one
i'm gonna get into a bit of this too
maybe without the computer.

[Jimfish]

yeah, you boys are the ones to do it - youve certainly got the tools!

[The Divide]

Yeah I was at this lil party at someones house this morning and some one was playing some realy minimal but still hard techno. I realy liked it, still had that dancefloor edje. sounded very midi orientated. Its great how you can do all this now without owning a 909. Reason rewired into SX and some decent sounds and your away. Its fun and realy flexable.

[The Divide]

Not forgetting some bad ass synths :D