____twoism

do you think the likes of Geogaddi was entirely composed on samplers?

Definitely not.

Mr? wrote:do you think the likes of Geogaddi was entirely composed on samplers?

No.

EDIT: I misread your question. Thought you meant they entirely use samples from other sources. Still probably a no though.

after listening to this album for 10 years, i don't see why it couldn't have...
some tracks wouldn't need to be on a sampler and possibly recorded direct to tape.
but i am interested as to how it would have been sequenced.

"How do you create your drum patterns?"

"It's a mixture of live performance and step sequencing. Sometimes, we make up sounds and then program them tightly in a really synthetic way. Other times, we want it to sound really rough, so we'll just jam on the drums live. For instance, "Dawn Chorus" is a single-take jammed beat that I played, while "1969" has a live beat all the way through mixed with other beat tracks."

http://bocpages.org/wiki/Dawn_Chorus

Yea i've read all that info before but if you actually listen to 1969 and take all the parts apart, it's pretty obvious everything in that tracks is sampled...

Question is...

If it isn't a sampled then sequenced, how are they recording the "live" track?

I believe BoC's stuff is often sample-driven, but with samples they themselves have made, rather than stuff taken from other records or films.

There's some interview where they say that most of their stuff is made by themselves and that they even recreated the sound of that Hair track for the album release of Aquarius. They frequently mention "friends singing for us" as well.

I'm not too knowledgable about production, but as far as I know samplers are no different from synths when it comes to sequencing. I guess the stuff you only hear once in a track is played by hand. Maybe they have event scores such as the ones on the back cover of Music for Airports...

when i say sampled I don't mean from a source that is not their own. I mean that they are using the sampler to record themselves or others whether it be synths, guitars, flutes, harp, farts, claps etc...then they are sequencing the sampler to create the track...

I don't think they have sampled hardly anything that isn't their own creation since the early days...

I know they have a reputation for using analogue hardware but it wouldn't surprise me if they used a computer program to layout the tracks in, just an audio editing program or something.

This artical mentions Logic Pro but this is Campfire Headphase era...

http://www.emusician.com/news/0766/boar ... ada/142201

I would how they did this for Geogaddi...

I know i'm getting into real detail here but it always intrigued me how they composed their tracks...particually how it's sequenced.

Mr? wrote:
I know i'm getting into real detail here but it always intrigued me how they composed their tracks...particually how it's sequenced.

While I'm curious about their recording process too, I don't want to know too much. As soon as we get into detail, we kill the mystique. I prefer the mystique.

Mr? wrote:when i say sampled I don't mean from a source that is not their own. I mean that they are using the sampler to record themselves or others whether it be synths, guitars, flutes, harp, farts, claps etc...then they are sequencing the sampler to create the track...

I don't think they have sampled hardly anything that isn't their own creation since the early days...

Oh, right. Well, if some of their stuff is tapes without any samplers intervening then that would make sequencing difficult, but still there are ways to do it. I don't know the technicalities but I know that most early synthpop records were made like that.

Mr? wrote:do you think the likes of Geogaddi was entirely composed on samplers?

The gear they use to make their music either serves to beautify the sound or is just part of a workflow thats comfortable to them .

In the case of sampling it might be a bit of both as the Akai S1000s was a steller sampler for time , quick to use and is well built to last ( when it doesn't crash ) .Though because of the size limitations for sounds it did things like bit crush etc .. adding to the "sound" if you will .

Im pretty sure that a lot of Geogaddi was sampled . Voices , drums , fx etc on the Akai and other machines .

Sample & edit >
decide what direction the sound should go in Lo-fi ,mid-fi or hi-fi >

For rich textured synth tones and pads they would run them through a Tascam msr 8-24 at high speed then play back at a slower speed . Or for drums compress them through a drawmer first dry >

Then process that HQ MSR recording through a revox home hi fi system , a tascam 246 , or a grundig depending on how you want to color the sound .

Finally resampling then recording to tape at 15ips or higher for masters of tracks or compositions .

I know for sure that all the flute effects in "Julie And Candy" were played on flute, recorded in tape recorders, and re-recorded on tape recorders until it got a scratchy effect.

Mr? wrote:after listening to this album for 10 years, i don't see why it couldn't have...
some tracks wouldn't need to be on a sampler and possibly recorded direct to tape.
but i am interested as to how it would have been sequenced.

I think a lot of people here are misunderstanding you, but I totally get it and agree.

I have five samplers myself. I usually record everything to them before it ever gets into a computer. All synth parts, drums, everything, goes straight into a sampler, and usually those are all running through each other, like a pedal chain. It's not the best for hi-fi, or the most exact method, but I don't care. It's easy, immediate, and most of all fun.

We use a hardware sequencer for arranging but it has incredible glitches at the end of every pattern of music, which is interesting up to a point. We usually only use computers for accurate sequencing now, you know, German timing."

http://bocpages.org/wiki/The_Colour_%26_The_Fire

from the same article

And some of our electronic tracks are not sequenced, we just put them down as samples onto multi-track tape, because it can sound more real and characteristic.

I knew you guys would dig up some gold!

I'm still trying to figure out how this masterpiece was put together. I think its their best work in terms of structure, composition and mystery.

i would say yes.
the ways they treat recorded audio is pretty much sampling, eg. recording to tape and then back out into a computer/sampler post processing. Nothing better then having an amazing synth that you can then sample

Those little 1 or 2 minute tracks could easily have been done straight to tape with some work, i think there music sounds a lot more complex then it is. in saying that they are electronic music pioneers in there ways.
What i used to do is make a loop or song then record the whole thing into a sampler, warp it, mash it, slow it down, add reverb etc, export it to logic, add layers and sometimes do it all again. you can get some amazing results if your making abstract music.
I think BOC just know how to make the sounds they want and they are just very creative samplers.

But yeah, geogaddi maybe not 100% samplers but almost everything was processed like it was sample (for example, those 'live' drums)
Also very little quantise, lots of the keys are very much played live for that human feel too


I think i read in a interview about the new LP that they didnt use computers for sequencing, would love to see their studio. almost certain they used a computer up until now, maybe not the early stuff.
ps love talking about this ey