making ache bit ouch my back

music x .

*duplicate post^^^^^^
why is this happening again?

i dont know if you are even making "music"

I adore renoise

You are talking about an assumed definition that you haven't really verified. The only academic source I could lazily find that deals with the origin of the term to some extent disagrees with your idea that chipmusic was primarily used in reference of C64 music.

You are the one making pointless meta-arguments. "Genre shouldn't matter" might be a relevant perspective with regards to the original question but you aren't making a good case for it by telling us how music should be enjoyed. I am sure everyone involved in this discussion are able to enjoy music irrespective of what they think is a reasonable way to categorize it. If there is any weight to "Genre shouldn't matter" at all you should agree that categorizing music doesn't necessarily impose on the process of creating it.

total nerds itt

uuuuugghhhhh... -.- such pointless squabbling. Genre shouldn't really matter. The fact that you have to label your music as this or that means that you're confining your view of yourself and your music to what others have been and are doing. Musicianship--the skillfull composition and execution of your music--is what really should matter. Make music to make music; what other people have to say is irrelevant so long as you derive enjoyment from your music.

Ha - that's not far from the truth is it. The technique 4Mat pioneered is exactly that, so the Amiga is a Waldorf

Wavetable Synthesis Composer doesn't quite have the same ring to it though...

I know what you're saying. I'm talking about the original definition, which was a bit more particular than that.

If you argue purely from a stylistic point of view, I guess this is kind of like arguing that new dubstep isn't dubstep because the original dubtep was almost nothing like what people make today, which makes some sense but genres\styles of music evolve over time. A lot of electronic music subgenres have changed radically since their inception, but chiptune hasn't necessarily gone through that kind of transformation. At least not to the same extent. People have kept on making chiptune on old hardware since the beginning and they won't stop anytime soon as long as there is a demand for this genre.

I guess if it will survive long enough at some point it won't even matter to anyone how it was made. We will probably make music in software exclusively anyway at some point in the future.

Renoise users get the luxury of calling their music whatever they want because they've decided to use a modern tracker over standard piano roll DAWs. I use Renoise and I make Sega Death Crushwave,

Why would I have to ignore that? Im just saying that a chiptune off a paula dac versus one off a consumer dac has a different sound. Perhaps we should go back in time and just tell those demosceners to call it WAVETABLE SYNTHESIS instead.

But then you would have to ignore the fact that chiptune on the Amiga started as a way of emulating the C64 sound. If I'm not mistaken, the term itself was coined by demoscene musicians in reference to C64 music, so it was at some point directly related to sound chips that had basic sounds built into them. If you go by the original definition, the chip you make on the Amiga is not really chip unless you actually sample sounds from a real sound chip.

In my opinion, for all intents and purposes, music that sounds like chiptune is chiptune at least to some degree.

Pro-actively fighting a battle that barely exists.

Also rofl at the "beeper music" reasoning.

This whole thread. *smh* what is even the point? Why do you get a kick out of this? What did it ever do to you?
I LOL'd but still...
*hedghog.bmp*

http://chipmusic.org/forums/topic/3988/ … read-this/