Roland R mix

seannash

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bp_tkFuzn3E

This is kinda what melodyne was promising (not sure if its capable of it at this stage)

looks relatively straight forward to use.

krd

Colour coded clouds of energy and harmonic matter


I don't think it does anything new. And in that example there are plenty of artefacting sounds - which is kind of honest of them.

I think in theory, at some point in the future, it will be possible to have software that can really strip the elements apart. But it wouldn't be simply signal processing. The software would need to be able to percieve the music like a human - with a really great ear - then take the elements appart and re-constitute them. Like take a rhodes, regenerate it from a libary, and then apply reverbs, eq, etc to make it sit properly.

It would be a bit like have software, with a button that says "make my mix un-suck"

It might also end up with that strange sound not perfect pub covers bands have. Where the cover is note and sound perfect, but strangely lacks something.

A sound engineeer, who would also be a good multi-instrumentalist, with the right set up (nothing insane - just a few instruements) Could replicate, and or strip pieces, just by recreating them.

I believe the standard practice in production houses now days, is to use samples initially and then get session players to recreate the sounds (It's cheaper than having to pay someone 50% of the royalties).

Buy the software could be Cargo Culting.
The idea that if assemble the right tools, the music will come.

If you wear the right track suit the music will come.

If you some music biz people would pay attention to you, the music will come.

If you could just get the chance to give Louis Walsh oral pleasure, the music will come.

If you stab enough people in the back, the music will come.

If people believe your bull****, the music will come.

Etc.

seannash

krd wrote: »

I believe the standard practice in production houses now days, is to use samples initially and then get session players to recreate the sounds (It's cheaper than having to pay someone 50% of the royalties).

Do you not still pay rotalties if you copy it by having a musician recreate it rather than sample it?

krd

seannash wrote: »

Do you not still pay rotalties if you copy it by having a musician recreate it rather than sample it?

It depends. If you copy the three note riff from The Stones Satisfaction - yep.

If you do a sound alike - you could be in trouble. Say if you took a melody from a Daft Punk tune, and then did a track that sounded like Daftpunk, you could be in trouble.


Just copying a short sequence won't have you in trouble. As long as it isn't recognisable as something very central to someone else's music.

In dance people can get away with murder. You could copy an entire David Guetta chord sequence and probably get away with it. There is one thing, record companies have lawyers, who can just slam an injunction on a track - if you don't have a lawyer, you can't fight back. Most of the time you can steal or remix whatever you like, and no one will come after you, because it's not worth their while.

Publishers used to accept a small once off fee for samples. Now they've got greedy, and they demand too much.

I'll give you an example of what is done. When Lilly Allen was writing Not Fair - I believe they took a sample from Johnny Cash's Ghost Riders in the Sky.

I do know, that they got session musicians to recreate the sample, afterwards. Now, had they used the sample straight from the song, or even admitted to using it, Cash's publisher could have demanded anything - 50%, even 100%. If it was 50%, Lilly Allen could owe Cash money every time the record got played on the radio.