17

(23 replies, posted in Nintendo Handhelds)

almost all my tracks have been with 2.3, most of them are on 8bc: https://8bc.org/members/melkor/

also forest world: https://8bc.org/members/forest+world/

18

(32 replies, posted in General Discussion)

the center indeed, the world revolves around me and my time zone. (nice catch on that one, didn't even think about it.)

19

(32 replies, posted in General Discussion)

an april fool's day joke?

a tad early then.

censored.

20

(226 replies, posted in Software & Plug-ins)

Here are a few more that may be of interest:

Sabotage Drum machine library (Huge. 214 drum and keyboard samples):
http://warbeats.com/Community/Forums/aft/57

UnitOvOne (Uncut abstract circuit bent stuff):
http://unitovone.com/?p=813

Artfx Sound Effects Sample Pack Vol. 1 (atmospheric, impacts, weird sounds 1gb dl):
http://www.artfx-studios.com/ARTFXv4/mu … s-volume-1

Univox SR-95/ Keio Mini Pops MP-7 Drum Machine (drum machines used on Jean Paul Jarre's Oxygene): [edit: this costs 3.5 GBP, I didn't realized that when I posted it]
http://www.forgottenkeys.co.uk/1_sr95.php

James' Circuit Bent Library:
http://www.illuminatedsounds.com/wp-con … amples.zip

Enjoy!

Another sound I hate, people whining about the sounds that I hate.
Another sound that I love, people articulating their hatred of chipjazz.

I absolutely hate and despise chip-jazz. I am generally somewhat queasy about the FM Genesis sound (especially the bass and drums). I like that talky-wav-bass-sound in LSDJ. I like really deep bass sounds in a movie score. I like the sound of turning pages.

23

(189 replies, posted in General Discussion)

Jansaw wrote:

This conversation has moved from electronic limitations to analog limitation, then to what defines music that people like, only to move slowly to a discussion on the necessity of 1Bit music.
Now I can't help but pick out one sentence from your previous post, Melkor:

Melkor wrote:

this is a minor aside but I personally don't consider music as belonging to art.

I strongly disagree.
By definition, art is created to showcase the creative and expressive skill of the artISTS. Those who produce works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power. While this obviously relates to visual arts, I believe calling music an art is EXACTLY how we should describe it; works of time created by a composer to convey expressivity through several emotional (therefore musical) catharses.
Would you call music non-expressive? This seems foolish to me. I believe people who view music in this light aren't musicians, only arrangers of sounds, yes there is a difference here. Musicians relate to the arts, and are expressive, arrangers of sound take ontological snippets of time and arrange them to be translated into psychological time purposes.
I agree that discussion is integral, and here I may just be the Schoenberg to your Stravinsky.

I would never call music non-expressive, but I would also never call most sentences or propositions non-expressive. I wouldn't call "arrangers of sound" non-expressive either. I also don't think that music is (primarily) a form of catharsis (am I understanding you correctly as catharsis as an Aristotlean purge of emotion?). Which is why I don't think it is art, but rather something better. I may be misunderstanding the terms, but I don't think music is an emotional purge (by the artist) to create or enhance emotions in those that experience it. Like an emotional vehicle for the artist. But rather something much more mundane or common. I don't think a child's crayon drawings are art and neither do I think an interesting pattern in nature is art. But these things are definitely beautiful and interesting. But any qualitative definition of art gets into trouble very quickly I think. Is punk art? It doesn't seem like it, specifically because of the anti-establishment/cultural outcastedness aspect of it. But then if music is art, why are the Misfits not considered art, and Mozart is? The Misfits definitely fit into our conceptions of modern art to a certain degree, at least more than Mozart. Is art then defined by intention? or what you seemed to say: "art is what an artist creates." The former seems problematic and too simple and broad (I meant this blink and then yawn of mine to be art) and the latter seems far too circular (What is art? That which is created by an artist. What is an artist? One who creates art.) Are the Beatles records art? The Misfits? Southern slave songs (which are some of the most expressive and emotional things one could imagine)? Again I say no, because they belong to the commons (by this I mean, not intellectual property rights but rather a seemingly universal intuitive understanding of music) in a way that I think is more powerful than mere "art".

24

(189 replies, posted in General Discussion)

BR1GHT PR1MATE wrote:

@Melkor: From your response, I can't really tell if you are talking about the "musicality" of 1-bit music or what. Beyond simply disliking them, what are the qualities of these tunes don't you feel "measures up" to your musical benchmark? If you don't like 1-bit music, I suppose thats fine, but that doesn't mean that they are devoid of art any more than bach's music for solo cello would be is you just didn't like the cello.

/meh

Why the "meh"? Isn't this fun?! But at this point I think we've come to the dead end of pure subjectivity. But I will press boldly onward.

Firstly, the "qualities of these [1-bit] tunes" that I don't like are the completed things themselves, the sound. I don't initially listen to music to hear great compositions, but rather the presentation of a composition (a song). I only pay attention (at least specifically or intentionally) to the compositional aspects AFTER the sound, groove, etc.. catches my attention and thus garnishes my approval as "good".

Secondly, A question: didn't classical composers (or modern) notate which instruments would play which part? Such as, a violin concerto or bass section, etc? I don't think I would like Beethoven's Ninth played with guitars (and I like guitars), or at the very least I don't think I would enjoy it as much as the piece performed "as intended" by Ludwig.

Thirdly, if we really want to get into the idea of a composition, is it strictly notation on a page, or could it include which instrument plays which part? Would the "wrong" choice of instrument render the song or the composition "bad"?

Fourthly, I don't doubt that several people truly enjoy 1-bit music for what it is. And further that some of it (I gather Shiru is quite good) is the paradigm of compositional excellence. But, that said, I have a sneaking suspicion that MOST people who enjoy 1-bit tunes do so (at least initially) not for brilliant composition, but rather because of composition embedded in a specific limitation. I think that the whole idea of pointing to compositional value is really an argumentative maneuver, because of the fact that it is extremely difficult (if not impossible) to argue about preferences, used to point to something beyond limitation. For example, "Ha ha, I win, you can't tell me what I don't like, and I like composition. And I like 1-bit BECAUSE of its compositional value."

Fifthly, this is a minor aside but I personally don't consider music as belonging to art. I think it is wonderful and emotive and pretty, and etc. and has artistic elements but that it is not art. It seems more primal to me, something deeper within us as humans, more Dionysian maybe.

Finally, to the people who after reading this thread want to respond "can't we all just get along? We all like the music right?!?!?" I disagree. Conversations like this are the very definition of getting along. Peaceful, thoughtful conversation in the midst of disagreement. And also are the definition of liking music I think, at least in a personal way. Challenging your own ideas about the things you enjoy.

25

(189 replies, posted in General Discussion)

fluidvolt wrote:

Melkor, your argument makes no sense. You asked if there were good 1bit songs/compositions, and some were presented to you. Perhaps the compositions presented aren't up to your standards, but in theory a good 1bit piece should be every bit as attainable as a composition for any instrument. To blacklist a composition by the virtue of what instrument it was composed on/for seems heavy-handed and frivolous. What if you arranged an excellent piece for two cellos as a 1bit piece? Would the composition itself, distinct from the performance, suddenly and irrevocably be degraded?

You ask if they would be considered good if they were made on more advanced software but that is a side-stepping of the main argument; A good composition would still be just that even if it were only sheet music scrawled on a cave wall.

Some good points here, but: there is a distinct difference between a song and a composition. A composition is as you say "only sheet music scrawled on a cave wall," while a song is a composition performed. An excellent cello piece arranged for 1bit, would obviously lose nothing as a composition, but I think would lose something as a song. I was not evaluating the aforementioned 1-bit songs as compositions, but as songs. Maybe this is just pure subjectivity, I don't know.

@ant1: I think you're in the minority with that viewpoint. Obviously some people like the raw sound of 1bit, but I think most people enjoy the songs because of what they were created on.

26

(189 replies, posted in General Discussion)

BR1GHT PR1MATE wrote:

uhhh...

pretty much anything by Shiru: http://soundcloud.com/shiru/disposal-orbit also check out attack on the mothership and astro force. genius.

pretty much anything by mr. beep: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62cnCg5YJVg

And after a listen to these gems I think my point is even further solidified. The only reason these were mentioned is because you assumed that by virtue of my posting on a chiptune site that I would "get" that these are good songs. When in fact they are not "good" (my apologies Shiru and mr. beep) but rather good FOR being made with 1-bit tools. Again subjectivity rears its head, but:
Would these songs be considered "good" if you found out that they were made with LSDJ? or NL2.3? or DS-10? or a modern DAW such as Ableton? I find that proposition utterly laughable. I really don't think that it is "the sound" in these cases, because honestly they sound like shit (maybe in a punk type of way, but shit regardless). I am not proposing that these songs are bad per se, but rather that the people who appreciate them, appreciate them BECAUSE OF the platform they were made on and BECAUSE OF its limitations and they recognize the skill it takes to coax the semblance of a song out of one. [Sorry if I am coming off as harsh, this is not an attack on primate, shiru, or beep, just expressing my perspective. keep doing that voodoo that you do]

27

(189 replies, posted in General Discussion)

BR1GHT PR1MATE wrote:

Tristan Perich seems pretty legit to me: http://www.1bitsymphony.com/

the limitation of music lies only with the composer, not the bit-rate, obviously

I'm glad you mentioned this because I actually searched around after my post and found Mr. Perich's projects, and I think it actually proves my point. Would you listen to the 1-bit symphony (and quote it as an example) if it was created with a modern DAW and titled "1-man symphony"? Maybe, but I think the reason you brought it up as a "good 1-bit song" was the fact the it is good FOR a 1-bit song (Sorry for the caps, I don't know enough internet to italicize). Which I think is really the heart of chiptune. Most of the (chip) music that is good, is good FOR being made on a specific platform. There is some good chiptune that is good as music qua music (in other words, the fact that it may be considered good REGARDLESS of what hardware/software were used to create it). Tristan's idea, while fascinating as a piece of modern art and a great idea, is strictly not good as music qua music. If it was, why go through the trouble with making a circuit for each consumer? You could just record the output of one, burn it on a cd and call it good. I realize that good is subjective and that you may think that the 1-bit symphony qualifies as a "good" song. To that I have nothing, except that I wouldn't really believe you.  Because I don't think that it is good IN-AND-OF-ITSELF as music but rather more so as a piece of modern art. Mayhap I am wrong, I read that Paul McCartney tried to write classical music but failed (critically) because of poor instrumentation. Is the 1-bit symphony the modern Beethoven's Ninth and we just need to play it with violins and violas, and viols? I think not.

28

(189 replies, posted in General Discussion)

Here's my 2cents:
Really good points raised about limitation in all forms of creative output, but I think really this concept/idea is integral to chiptune, hence the fakebit sucks attitude that is pervasive (by no means universal or even a majority, but it exists definitely [as an aside, a similar thing happens in regards to synths "analog or die"]) or the popularity of 1-bit shit. I am slightly ignorant about this, but has anyone heard a good 1-bit song? Not a cool melody, not an amazing example of economy, but a good song? How many young (ish/er) people like modern jazz? I'll hazard a guess, not many. But you can find several chip-jazz songs/artists that are quite popular, seemingly on the basis of what the song was made on (mainly) and/or the technical aspect behind it. I personally think this whole "scene" is very rarely about the music/songs, but it is strictly defined by the instrument, not the sound, the nostalgia, etc. People will say the sound, and I believe them, but that is not what it's about. I can make square waves, easily and by cheaper methods than a gameboy. Being about the instrument, talk of limitation arises because the whole ethos is about repurposing something. You don't talk about the limitations of a guitar because you aren't using it as a platform to play video games. 99% of the people who use a guitar use it for its intended purpose, not as a paper weight or kindling. The limitation aspect comes about because making music with a gameboy is strictly not its intended purpose. Similar ideas come about in regards to hacking or circuit bending.

29

(6 replies, posted in Software & Plug-ins)

I just stumbled upon this awesome piece of software that does really extreme time stretching. You can create some really nice ambient soundscapes with it. I believe it was created by the same guy who made the ZynAddSubFX softsynth. Its called PaulStretch and is donationware, here is the link: hypermammut.sourceforge.net/paulstretch/
thought you guys might enjoy it, I am having some fun with it personally.

3-6 hrs, but I spend a lot more just listening to parts over and over, or listening to the completed thing on the GB before I record it, then listening to it alot on the computer while i tweak with it. A lot of my time is wasted.

31

(226 replies, posted in Software & Plug-ins)

That Conet Project (Numbers Stations) is fucking incredible. I'd heard of the backwards music channel but didn't really research it. Thanks for posting that link (and everything else) Mr. muB!