Things you dont like in Tomorrow's Harvest aestetics

[mokaz]

Okay so i've edited the original post and the next one who's bitchin about bitch crusher will be, well, huum bitch snatched okay !! just kiddin, have a gooood week end BoCaz !!!

[mc10101]

Okay so i've edited the original post and the next one who's bitchin about bitch crusher will be, well, huum bitch snatched okay !! just kiddin, have a gooood week end BoCaz !!!

I reckon more than one hip-hop producer will adopt that term now anyway

[earthportal]

I don't really have much of a clue about music production, while many or even most folk on here are music producers, so I have a general question, out of curiosity - do you think that being able to recognise various production techniques is a benefit or hindrance to a new music listening experience - does analysing details get in the way of experiencing the overall feel of a tune or add an extra dimension to it?
I'm curious because I think that in my own current and previous professions, being aware of details and techniques had interesting effects on how I saw things around me and it led me on to thinking how this might affect someone who is an professional critic, whether the validity of their review/judgement of something might change according to whether the reader has the same technical knowledge as them? Does this make sense?

Yes and no.
Before I started making music I would wonder how electronic music was made and think that is was way more complicated than it is. The reality is so much simpler. Silly things like stutter, delay and repeat effects, I thought each and every sound heard was placed and doctored to suit, which would have been a crazy amount of work. Now, I know how most stuff is created and it does sort of spoil the experience as you can tell how much work (possibly) has gone into the piece. On the other hand it does bring a different enjoyment to the music knowing this.
I don't enjoy the music any less I guess, if somethings good then it's good whether you can tell whether the producer has spent 5 minutes on it or whether it's so complex it may have taken months to do.

I would agree. I think it just depends. Sometimes it can spoil the experience because you can analyze something from a technical perspective instead of just enjoying the magic of it. But more often than not, and especially with artists such as Boards of Canada, I find myself having the experience enhanced by being blown away by a particular ride cymbal that is placed in the mix so well and designed sonically in this strange way that I have never heard before. It really can increase the enjoyment for me, being able to appreciate their technical choices. However I think it's all subjective and to say that someone with audio skills could appreciate it more, I would say no. It all depends on the listener and the experience of the music and how it moves you.

[Sun Drugs]

i cant help myself, when i listen to boards i analyse the production. IMO this is the finest produced album out this year. The mastering is spot on, would love to hear the pre-masters though.

anyways why i bumped this badboy is in a recent interview they mention they have stopped using a computer to sequence. I guess if they were going for that old soundtrack vibe they would have used some analog sequencers, lots of cv's and gates, for some parts but its got me thinking how did they arrange if theyre off pro tools or whatever.

MIKE: A couple of old synths, that we really loved so much, died during the recording. At that point we opted for what any insightful and smart person would have done: we replaced them with older, even more shabby synths. Smart move, isn't it? Speaking in general, we actually did a deep research on the audio equipments that were commonly used for movie soundtracks during the 80s... and le'ts say we really worked hard on this. We've lost our heads on this matter, perhaps we've exaggerated a bit, maybe we took this a bit too maniacally. But aside from this, for the sequencers we decided to rely only on hardware, withouth softwares: you can't imagine what a relief it was to get rid of all those grids on screen teling you what to do and when to do it.


The more i think the more it might make sense they use MPC's. Why, because firstly they are largely focused on using samplers. I would say most of the sounds are processed at some stage on the album. Mpcs are perfect for arranging if you dont want to use a PC. They are portable, so if or when they were traveling it would be perfect to bring wherever, easy to exchange files, easy to keep samples stored to re-use and make sketches that they can then finish in the proper studio.. i dunno man the quotes thrown me off a bit. the production is so tight.
what you nerds reckon?

[Headphase]

The thing I don't like about TH is the fact that with every other album, I can listen to them over and over and never get tired of them, but with this album....I don't know what it is but I just can't do the same.

[The-Artist-64]

Overall, the album lacked diversity in each song.

I'm sorry to say it wasn't as great as I expected.

[ONTHE88]

I think a big part of the issue is the direction the musical landscape has taken during the bros. absence. We've been pretty saturated with the sounds of analog synths and particularly the (as I've heard it referenced here) "Video Nasties" motif at this point. Had this album came out 4 yrs ago, it would have sounded MUCH more alien and fresh. I'm just happy that I'm an analog synth junkie, and can receive repeated listen of this album with open arms

[Betacord]

I understand what they were going for... The similarity between a number of songs is not a disappointment in that regard. The downside of that is when it does suddenly break from the style (Palace Posy's opening in particular) it just seems to be on the border of not belonging with the others... But the production is just excellent, for sure.

[Radio Kadugli]

i cant help myself, when i listen to boards i analyse the production. IMO this is the finest produced album out this year. The mastering is spot on, would love to hear the pre-masters though.

anyways why i bumped this badboy is in a recent interview they mention they have stopped using a computer to sequence. I guess if they were going for that old soundtrack vibe they would have used some analog sequencers, lots of cv's and gates, for some parts but its got me thinking how did they arrange if theyre off pro tools or whatever.

MIKE: A couple of old synths, that we really loved so much, died during the recording. At that point we opted for what any insightful and smart person would have done: we replaced them with older, even more shabby synths. Smart move, isn't it? Speaking in general, we actually did a deep research on the audio equipments that were commonly used for movie soundtracks during the 80s... and le'ts say we really worked hard on this. We've lost our heads on this matter, perhaps we've exaggerated a bit, maybe we took this a bit too maniacally. But aside from this, for the sequencers we decided to rely only on hardware, withouth softwares: you can't imagine what a relief it was to get rid of all those grids on screen teling you what to do and when to do it.


The more i think the more it might make sense they use MPC's. Why, because firstly they are largely focused on using samplers. I would say most of the sounds are processed at some stage on the album. Mpcs are perfect for arranging if you dont want to use a PC. They are portable, so if or when they were traveling it would be perfect to bring wherever, easy to exchange files, easy to keep samples stored to re-use and make sketches that they can then finish in the proper studio.. i dunno man the quotes thrown me off a bit. the production is so tight.
what you nerds reckon?

It's funny. I love the production, too, but for the reason I felt they stepped back in time with their production. When I was studying to do film scoring years ago in my earlier life, I loved studying the old Italian composers from Morricone to Frizzi, and especially loved the 70's-80's era. I can hear the machines they used all over TH. The DX7 (a magnificent, misused gem of this era) shows up all over it, (or similar FM synth) and it sounds like BOC took the time to learn the EG scaling and algorithms on it. A lot of composers wouldn't even bother with that. The Day of the Dead 'Suite' by John Harrison is like 85% DX7, but he doesn't even bother programming it! In addition to that, sounds like BOC recorded a lot on tape.

Anyways, this is such a success at time machine composition, isn't it? They REALLY captured what set out to do with the video nasty element, but using and seemingly recording as it was done back then. No digital workstations or soft synths or what not, but blood and sweat and tears and hardware. They nail it.

[Sun Drugs]

thats interesting, i thought there was quite a FM sound throughout.


after a little time to let the album settle im stoked on it, its just as good as campfire, for me the first two lps are in a league of their own with a beautiful place, hopefully the next album will get a little darker again. I think TH is a step in the right direction anyways.

Its so rare you get artists who are so committed to following through with concepts like they do. Every album has improved with its production and the conceptual work is pretty much also in a league of its own compared to most contemporary artists

I struggle to see how a fan of their music can be disappointed but each to their own

[steeldancer-x]

Personal nitpick, do not love the 'mutual understanding' that Tomorrow's Harvest is about apocalypse. It feels counterintuitive to what the brothers have been trying to say for years. I know, I know, 'but we are gonna send ourselves to the apocalypse!'
Doesn't mean it's the end!!!!

[arvy]

ask this choob

[Wildfire]

I'm sure most of the arrangements were made using a DAW of course (BOC have said as much themselves). The depth of production and many layers would be a logistical nightmare to manage on a stand-alone sequencer. And yes I would imagine that pretty much all the elements, no matter what they were created on, were then recorded into the DAW. Apart from anything else this makes mixing far more practical. It means you can go back and easily tweak a track months or even years later, this has a huge advantage particularly when you are working with notoriously unstable old synths and other analog equipment where you might never be able to get that exact sound back again!
Try BT's "Binary Universe" for a truly DAW-produced album - the slick, squeaky clean finish is not what the warmth of TH sounds like to me at all

I'm sure I read that the whole album was done on a hardware sequencer, have a I imagined that?

[Kyla]

It's a bit of a downer.