____twoism

Haha yes, its awesome! A cock on the coin! YAAAAAY.

Sweden and Finland: The penis and testicles of europe.

fuck yea, penis citizen rise up! i live in the mid/north on on that thing

Hi everyone. Long time browser here, but this is my first post.

As a recording sound artist myself, it is not uncommon for me to use all manner of methods to mangle individual sounds within a piece.

For instance, I may record some people speaking, and slow it right down, so it's almost impossible to decipher.

At the same time I might record a car engine idling, and speed it up so much, that it too is hard to recognise.

Then I could layer one, on top of the other, and add a reversed synthesizer on top.

I could then change the tempo of the whole track, mix it down and release it.


Somebody could easily play my track backwards using software, and conclude that the synth sounds better that way. Or they could speed it up, and this might enable them to hear the voices at the speed they were recorded at, and they might think this is how the track was intended.

One could also slow the track right down, so that the engine now sounds just like an engine.


My point is, that all these things are not only possible, but quite likely, with a recording that involves manipulating sounds the way BoC and others do. That however does not mean that the record is supposed to be played at a speed or direction, other than the speed/ direction specified by the format of the actual release.


That said, everybody is entitled to reverse or slow down whatever they want. You can even watch your tv upside down if you wish.


Anyway, looking forward to BoCs next release, and thanks for having me.

GH wrote:You can even watch your tv upside down if you wish.

haha

GH wrote:Hi everyone. Long time browser here, but this is my first post.

As a recording sound artist myself, it is not uncommon for me to use all manner of methods to mangle individual sounds within a piece.

For instance, I may record some people speaking, and slow it right down, so it's almost impossible to decipher.

At the same time I might record a car engine idling, and speed it up so much, that it too is hard to recognise.

Then I could layer one, on top of the other, and add a reversed synthesizer on top.

I could then change the tempo of the whole track, mix it down and release it.


Somebody could easily play my track backwards using software, and conclude that the synth sounds better that way. Or they could speed it up, and this might enable them to hear the voices at the speed they were recorded at, and they might think this is how the track was intended.

One could also slow the track right down, so that the engine now sounds just like an engine.


My point is, that all these things are not only possible, but quite likely, with a recording that involves manipulating sounds the way BoC and others do. That however does not mean that the record is supposed to be played at a speed or direction, other than the speed/ direction specified by the format of the actual release.


That said, everybody is entitled to reverse or slow down whatever they want. You can even watch your tv upside down if you wish.


Anyway, looking forward to BoCs next release, and thanks for having me.

Precisely. Welcome to the board. (:

Skytree wrote:

GH wrote:Hi everyone. Long time browser here, but this is my first post.

As a recording sound artist myself, it is not uncommon for me to use all manner of methods to mangle individual sounds within a piece.

For instance, I may record some people speaking, and slow it right down, so it's almost impossible to decipher.

At the same time I might record a car engine idling, and speed it up so much, that it too is hard to recognise.

Then I could layer one, on top of the other, and add a reversed synthesizer on top.

I could then change the tempo of the whole track, mix it down and release it.


Somebody could easily play my track backwards using software, and conclude that the synth sounds better that way. Or they could speed it up, and this might enable them to hear the voices at the speed they were recorded at, and they might think this is how the track was intended.

One could also slow the track right down, so that the engine now sounds just like an engine.


My point is, that all these things are not only possible, but quite likely, with a recording that involves manipulating sounds the way BoC and others do. That however does not mean that the record is supposed to be played at a speed or direction, other than the speed/ direction specified by the format of the actual release.


That said, everybody is entitled to reverse or slow down whatever they want. You can even watch your tv upside down if you wish.


Anyway, looking forward to BoCs next release, and thanks for having me.

they tune their all of their samples to key reference.

dave_from_2001 wrote:

Skytree wrote:

GH wrote:Hi everyone. Long time browser here, but this is my first post.

As a recording sound artist myself, it is not uncommon for me to use all manner of methods to mangle individual sounds within a piece.

For instance, I may record some people speaking, and slow it right down, so it's almost impossible to decipher.

At the same time I might record a car engine idling, and speed it up so much, that it too is hard to recognise.

Then I could layer one, on top of the other, and add a reversed synthesizer on top.

I could then change the tempo of the whole track, mix it down and release it.


Somebody could easily play my track backwards using software, and conclude that the synth sounds better that way. Or they could speed it up, and this might enable them to hear the voices at the speed they were recorded at, and they might think this is how the track was intended.

One could also slow the track right down, so that the engine now sounds just like an engine.


My point is, that all these things are not only possible, but quite likely, with a recording that involves manipulating sounds the way BoC and others do. That however does not mean that the record is supposed to be played at a speed or direction, other than the speed/ direction specified by the format of the actual release.


That said, everybody is entitled to reverse or slow down whatever they want. You can even watch your tv upside down if you wish.


Anyway, looking forward to BoCs next release, and thanks for having me.

they tune their all of their samples to key reference.

Im not sure I follow what you meen. The pitch of all samples are relative so slowed down or sped up the relationship between all frequencies stays the same, so it wont go out of tune relative to itself.

Maby they had one key reference, like say 90bpm or something for the track and then periodicly sped it up to test if it still sounded ok. Kinda like a dual mix or something. Probably just coincidence that it sound ok on 33 and 45 tho tbh.

i think i mean that if there is a sample of a bicycle falling over, for example, it resonates at a certain frequency, on average, by manipulation of the frequency, so goes the track. "tuning" might also just be "choosing", as with experimenting by tossing media in randomly, and discovering a sound that goes with the track musically as it were, and not just rhymically. in any case the music has all been, for the most part, harmonically congruous, i think, the birds and babies sounding away. its very possible that they write music from samples (a found sound) in the abstract, as in the case of the bicycle falling over, and a melody that is reflected off of that, or the singing bicycle crash if you like.

i'm almost certain that they've ganked bird calls for their riffs before, but birds probably sing in perfect pitch, and not the bike, so whatever.

dave_from_2001 wrote:i think i mean that if there is a sample of a bicycle falling over, for example, it resonates at a certain frequency, on average, by manipulation of the frequency, so goes the track. "tuning" might also just be "choosing", as with experimenting by tossing media in randomly, and discovering a sound that goes with the track musically as it were, and not just rhymically. in any case the music has all been, for the most part, harmonically congruous, i think, the birds and babies sounding away. its very possible that they write music from samples (a found sound) in the abstract, as in the case of the bicycle falling over, and a melody that is reflected off of that, or the singing bicycle crash if you like.

i'm almost certain that they've ganked bird calls for their riffs before, but birds probably sing in perfect pitch, and not the bike, so whatever.

Birds generally sing in relative pitch. I have come across one or two birdsongs that are in perfect pitch, but it's rare (very rewarding to find, though). They often, however, sing at near perfect intervals. So, it's just a matter of re-pitching the whole thing to get it in tune with a track.

I think it would be incredibly difficult to find the "resonant average pitch" of a bicycle falling over, though...it would be too chaotic. But, you can do this with lots of other common sounds, like wind whistling through trees (the fundamental tone, anyway), or waves lapping on a lake at regular periodicity, etc.

In any case, I don't think that this sort of thing is too uncommon with electronic musicians, at least those that play quite a bit with field recordings and found sounds. It's just too fun to leave alone. (:

It's possible to give a non-musical sound such as a bike falling over, a uniform pitch of sorts, using eq to reduce, or filter out altogether, the other frequencies.

This works for me when creating ambient drone type soundscapes.

GH wrote:It's possible to give a non-musical sound such as a bike falling over, a uniform pitch of sorts, using eq to reduce, or filter out altogether, the other frequencies.

This works for me when creating ambient drone type soundscapes.

True, it's possible, but probably very difficult.

Makes me think that this would be a fun competition, but looks like you've got an edge in the resonant-bike-frequency department.

How are we dropping this bike, anyway? And is it African or European, laden or unladen?

GH wrote:It's possible to give a non-musical sound such as a bike falling over, a uniform pitch of sorts, using eq to reduce, or filter out altogether, the other frequencies.

Of course, couldn't you just autotune it?

Moebius wrote:

GH wrote:It's possible to give a non-musical sound such as a bike falling over, a uniform pitch of sorts, using eq to reduce, or filter out altogether, the other frequencies.

Of course, couldn't you just autotune it?

Perhaps vocoding the bike might sound more natural, just a thought.

Pantheon wrote:

Moebius wrote:

GH wrote:It's possible to give a non-musical sound such as a bike falling over, a uniform pitch of sorts, using eq to reduce, or filter out altogether, the other frequencies.

Of course, couldn't you just autotune it?

Perhaps vocoding the bike might sound more natural, just a thought.

That'd definitely do the trick. But, then you're essentially convoluting the waveform of the bike recording with the another waveform. So, we're getting distant from the idea of "warping" a sample in some way to bring out some harmonics that you can tune. Still, it's definitely a cool idea. I'd be interested to hear what it might sound like. (:

Skytree wrote:

Pantheon wrote:

Moebius wrote:

GH wrote:It's possible to give a non-musical sound such as a bike falling over, a uniform pitch of sorts, using eq to reduce, or filter out altogether, the other frequencies.

Of course, couldn't you just autotune it?

Perhaps vocoding the bike might sound more natural, just a thought.

That'd definitely do the trick. But, then you're essentially convoluting the waveform of the bike recording with the another waveform. So, we're getting distant from the idea of "warping" a sample in some way to bring out some harmonics that you can tune. Still, it's definitely a cool idea. I'd be interested to hear what it might sound like. (:

Theres a possibility that vocoding the bike sample with the same recording for both modulator and carrier would bring out the dominant resonant frequencies. The same process can be repeated again and again in theory to enhance them farther. I dont have a clue what that would sound like tho, I havent tested the idea.

saob wrote:fuck yea, penis citizen rise up! i live in the mid/north on on that thing

I'm on the cock as well! Damn Norway, fucking up the coins by not joining the EU.

33rpm Alpha and Omega is fucking boring.

Pantheon wrote:

Moebius wrote:

GH wrote:It's possible to give a non-musical sound such as a bike falling over, a uniform pitch of sorts, using eq to reduce, or filter out altogether, the other frequencies.

Of course, couldn't you just autotune it?

Perhaps vocoding the bike might sound more natural, just a thought.

someone vocode a bicycle

If we're doing the whole "other ways to listen to music" thing, at this link is a program that lets you stretch a sound out as long as you like, without altering the pitch

http://hypermammut.sourceforge.net/paulstretch/

And when I say as long as you like, I MEAN as long as you like. Each track lasting 24 hours? No problem!