boomlinde
Offline
Sweden
SuperBustySamuraiMonkey wrote:

I dont think Im right, theres stuff that simply "is". You play a chip based device? chipmusic. You play a modern computer with synths and awl? Not chipmusic (altho, linguistically, for all you little Chomsky heads, yes, 95% of electronic music is "chip" music. But we dont call rock and roll "coil music").

Right, so you agree that the definition isn't necessarily entirely technical? If you mean to say that rock music has as much to do with rocks or rocking as 8-bit music has to do with 8-bit machines, I agree with you. There is a vague but intuitive connection, but not much more.

SuperBustySamuraiMonkey wrote:

¿You play 8 bit samples? A polemic question, but you get what I mean. (Personally, unless youre in an old school tracker, id say, no, thats not chipmusic)

So the method makes a difference, regardless of the particular hardware?

SuperBustySamuraiMonkey wrote:

I care about people caring. Im so sick of labels and frontiers and elitism. WHO REALLY CARES about if this is 8 bit or not or 9 or fakebit or dumbstep or dnb or pop.

If what you cared about was people caring, why would you present a definition of 8-bit music as something that "simply is"? That probably makes the most elitist stance presented in this thread?

SuperBustySamuraiMonkey wrote:

My condescending tone comes from the attitude of people willing to dig deep in this topic again. I wish Crystal castles would steal another sample or someone says "mario at a rave" again on tv, at least in those deja vu topics we get some laughs.

You were the one who posted a four line guide to 8-bit music categorization that obviously not everyone agrees with. In comparison, I feel like what I've said here is generously inclusive of the subjective standards people hold, including those you presented in your last post. Didn't you expect your posts would fuel the discussion? You seem to be looking to have the last word, all while telling everyone how tired you are of the topic.

SuperBustySamuraiMonkey
Offline
Madriz, Supain
boomlinde wrote:
SuperBustySamuraiMonkey wrote:

I dont think Im right, theres stuff that simply "is". You play a chip based device? chipmusic. You play a modern computer with synths and awl? Not chipmusic (altho, linguistically, for all you little Chomsky heads, yes, 95% of electronic music is "chip" music. But we dont call rock and roll "coil music").

Right, so you agree that the definition isn't necessarily entirely technical? If you mean to say that rock music has as much to do with rocks or rocking as 8-bit music has to do with 8-bit machines, I agree with you. There is a vague but intuitive connection, but not much more.

SuperBustySamuraiMonkey wrote:

¿You play 8 bit samples? A polemic question, but you get what I mean. (Personally, unless youre in an old school tracker, id say, no, thats not chipmusic)

So the method makes a difference, regardless of the particular hardware?

SuperBustySamuraiMonkey wrote:

I care about people caring. Im so sick of labels and frontiers and elitism. WHO REALLY CARES about if this is 8 bit or not or 9 or fakebit or dumbstep or dnb or pop.

If what you cared about was people caring, why would you present a definition of 8-bit music as something that "simply is"? That probably makes the most elitist stance presented in this thread?

SuperBustySamuraiMonkey wrote:

My condescending tone comes from the attitude of people willing to dig deep in this topic again. I wish Crystal castles would steal another sample or someone says "mario at a rave" again on tv, at least in those deja vu topics we get some laughs.

You were the one who posted a four line guide to 8-bit music categorization that obviously not everyone agrees with. In comparison, I feel like what I've said here is generously inclusive of the subjective standards people hold, including those you presented in your last post. Didn't you expect your posts would fuel the discussion? You seem to be looking to have the last word, all while telling everyone how tired you are of the topic.

You dont understand. Im tired of the discussion AT ALL. We all know what chipmusic is and what isnt, and we all know where the polemic opinions lay.

I dont care about my definition. I dont care about yours. I dont fucking care, for real. Im not even looking to win an argument. I simply dont understand why is it so important to do music incrustrated in a gimmic label or not. I use a gameboy in my electronic duo. Fine. Call it whatever you want. But I compose the same songs I do in my guitar bass and drums one. At the end of the day, the people who come to the concerts doesnt care about if its true chip or not or what the hell chip is.

But hey, if this is gonna end up in an endless argument, I quit. Im not gonna convince you that I dont care (you keep replying like a kid "if you dont care why youuuu replyyy meee") and you're not gonna convince me of whatever youre trying to convince me.

Seriously everybody, do whatever you want in music.

calmdownkidder
Offline
Liverpool, UK

How can 8-bit be retro, guitars are older than computers.

sandneil
Offline

bitpop has to be pop music i guess

boomlinde
Offline
Sweden
SuperBustySamuraiMonkey wrote:

We all know what chipmusic is and what isnt, and we all know where the polemic opinions lay.

Why would there ever be discussions about it if we all had a mutual understanding of what chipmusic is? I'm not sure what's polemic about any of these opinions. I respectfully disagree with you, and I understand that I'm not going to change your mind, but in my mind, exchanging opinions is what internet forums are for, and a good discussion (or even if it's just venting opinions without the other part even acknowledging your arguments) is a reward in itself.

SuperBustySamuraiMonkey wrote:

I simply dont understand why is it so important to do music incrustrated in a gimmic label or not.

I don't think pigeonholing your own music before you set out to create it is the only use of discussing classification, but I respect people who do just that. That's not why I replied to you in the first place, though, and as far as I'm concerned it isn't what this discussion is about, so I apologize for whatever I said to make you think I hold a particular opinion in that matter.

SuperBustySamuraiMonkey wrote:

But hey, if this is gonna end up in an endless argument, I quit. Im not gonna convince you that I dont care (you keep replying like a kid "if you dont care why youuuu replyyy meee") and you're not gonna convince me of whatever youre trying to convince me.

You were telling me to keep calm, and now you resort to name calling. I think it's a relevant question to ask someone who laces every post with "who cares?" while showing an undeniable concern about the matter, and if you think that's childish I invite you to explain why.

SuperBustySamuraiMonkey wrote:

Seriously everybody, do whatever you want in music.

Except trying to classify it because "who cares"?

Last edited by boomlinde (Dec 28, 2013 1:16 am)

boomlinde
Offline
Sweden
Bit wish wrote:

8bit has to do with graphics, chip music has to do with music that is made from old video game systems.

8-bit intrinsically has as little to do with graphics as with audio.

Bit wish wrote:

Or things that simulate the sounds you would get from those systems, which that is called fake-bit.

If your intentions are to clarify anything, I think it's worth mentioning that far from everyone agree with this.

boomlinde
Offline
Sweden
Bit wish wrote:

No, it would be considered "fake-bit".

What is the authority that decides? It's certainly not a mutually held opinion in the community.

Bit wish wrote:

Please call "8bit" chip tune, or chip music please.

Why?

Bit wish wrote:

Chip music is music made using old vintage video game systems, like for instance; if a person makes music using the 1989 gameboy that would be considered chip music.

Whereas, if a person were to make music using sounds that sound like, or imitate sounds you would here from an game boy, Atari (you get the point) but using Ableton or Renoise, that would be considered fake bit.

As far as I've read, when the term came into broad use it was used to describe Amiga modules that sounded more like the previous generation of PCs and video game systems in their use of short and simple waveforms. Maybe not just for the purpose of imitation or stylistic preference; practical reasons also seem to have made the style popular (you can fit them into small intros etc.). It seems kind of oxymoronic for your definition to exclude the defining era of chipmusic simply for being imitative. I'm not saying that you are definitely wrong (I don't even know for sure that I'm completely right about the history of chipmusic) or that it was your intention to say that, I'm just trying to say out that you won't easily define chipmusic in a few neat bullet points.

Bit wish wrote:

But there are some exceptions in between and far tho.

Could you point me to some of these rare exceptions that somehow transcend this straight-forward black and white classification?

Bit wish
Offline
New Albany Indiana
boomlinde wrote:
Bit wish wrote:

8bit has to do with graphics, chip music has to do with music that is made from old video game systems.

8-bit intrinsically has as little to do with graphics as with audio.

I do agree chipmusic and 8bit graphics go hand and hand together, but referencing chipmusic as 8bit is like referencing dub-step as 72 bit music.

boomlinde wrote:
Bit wish wrote:

Or things that simulate the sounds you would get from those systems, which that is called fake-bit.

If your intentions are to clarify anything, I think it's worth mentioning that far from everyone agree with this.

Ok then, what do you think fake bit is?

Last edited by Bit wish (Dec 28, 2013 3:02 am)

Bit wish
Offline
New Albany Indiana
boomlinde wrote:
Bit wish wrote:

No, it would be considered "fake-bit".

What is the authority that decides? It's certainly not a mutually held opinion in the community.

Fakebit, sometimes also called 9-Bit, refers to a style of electronic music that differs from real 8-bit (music) in being made with the technical resources of sound emulation or VSTi (software synthesizers) instead of real low bit computers and gaming consoles.

boomlinde wrote:

Bit wish wrote:

Please call "8bit" chip tune, or chip music please.

Why?

I guess it's just a personal preference, so discard that. Just know that that has nothing to do directly with audio.

boomlinde wrote:

Bit wish wrote:

Chip music is music made using old vintage video game systems, like for instance; if a person makes music using the 1989 gameboy that would be considered chip music.

Whereas, if a person were to make music using sounds that sound like, or imitate sounds you would here from an game boy, Atari (you get the point) but using Ableton or Renoise, that would be considered fake bit.

As far as I've read, when the term came into broad use it was used to describe Amiga modules that sounded more like the previous generation of PCs and video game systems in their use of short and simple waveforms. Maybe not just for the purpose of imitation or stylistic preference; practical reasons also seem to have made the style popular (you can fit them into small intros etc.). It seems kind of oxymoronic for your definition to exclude the defining era of chipmusic simply for being imitative. I'm not saying that you are definitely wrong (I don't even know for sure that I'm completely right about the history of chipmusic) or that it was your intention to say that, I'm just trying to say out that you won't easily define chipmusic in a few neat bullet points.

I guess it really depends on who you ask then.

boomlinde wrote:

Bit wish wrote:

But there are some exceptions in between and far tho.

Could you point me to some of these rare exceptions that somehow transcend this straight-forward black and white classification?

An example of an exception: Shirobon's Back Tracking EP: http://shirobon.bandcamp.com/album/back-tracking

Uses gameboy, comadore 64, and at the same time uses vst instruments on Renoise.

Last edited by Bit wish (Dec 28, 2013 3:03 am)

sleepytimejesse
Offline
Youngstown, OH

Is anamanabanana chiptoon when tthey use guitars???

how when guitar doesnt have memory even 8 bytes of it?

chunter
Offline
Brunswick, GA USA

8-bit is Sega's fault.

In the 80s they weren't called 8-bit consoles or 8-bit computers, they were video game machines or home computers, respectively.

When Genesis/Megadrive was launched, Sega marketing put so much emphasis on the 16-bit CPU doing "what Nintendont" that from then on the question "How many bits is it?" was annoyingly asked to all sales people about every video game console thereafter even when the person asked or the person asking had no idea what that means. I really hope people don't ask that question about XBone and PS4.

boomlinde
Offline
Sweden
Bit wish wrote:

I do agree chipmusic and 8bit graphics go hand and hand together,

That's not what I said and I don't agree with that.

Bit wish wrote:

but referencing chipmusic as 8bit is like referencing dub-step as 72 bit music.

How so? There is no immediate logical link in that comparison.

Bit wish wrote:

Ok then, what do you think fake bit is?

I'm not trying to define fakebit. I'm trying to make you realize that you made your definition up yourself out of the blue.

Alpine
Offline
UK, Leicester
chunter wrote:

8-bit is Sega's fault.

In the 80s they weren't called 8-bit consoles or 8-bit computers, they were video game machines or home computers, respectively.

When Genesis/Megadrive was launched, Sega marketing put so much emphasis on the 16-bit CPU doing "what Nintendont" that from then on the question "How many bits is it?" was annoyingly asked to all sales people about every video game console thereafter even when the person asked or the person asking had no idea what that means. I really hope people don't ask that question about XBone and PS4.

well the 6gen era, gamecube, xbox and that shizz was sometimes called the 128bit era. That would make last gen the 256bit era, and the current one the 512bit era.

Obviously this is a bag of wank.

boomlinde
Offline
Sweden
Bit wish wrote:
boomlinde wrote:

What is the authority that decides? It's certainly not a mutually held opinion in the community.

Fakebit, sometimes also called 9-Bit, refers to a style of electronic music that differs from real 8-bit (music) in being made with the technical resources of sound emulation or VSTi (software synthesizers) instead of real low bit computers and gaming consoles.

DId you read my question? You're not answering it.

boomlinde wrote:

I guess it really depends on who you ask then.

Which is my point exactly, thank you.

boomlinde
Offline
Sweden
chunter wrote:

8-bit is Sega's fault.

In the 80s they weren't called 8-bit consoles or 8-bit computers, they were video game machines or home computers, respectively.

When Genesis/Megadrive was launched, Sega marketing put so much emphasis on the 16-bit CPU doing "what Nintendont" that from then on the question "How many bits is it?" was annoyingly asked to all sales people about every video game console thereafter even when the person asked or the person asking had no idea what that means. I really hope people don't ask that question about XBone and PS4.

I agree that "bitness" didn't become a particularly defining metric until there were actually 16-bit machines available to consumers, but I think the development was natural, because between different processor architectures it was IMO a better indicator of what CPU performance to expect than clock frequency is today, and with the Megadrive's modest amount of RAM it couldn't really compete on some of the terms that 16-bit computers did at the time. Add to that the fact that home computers were still sort of aimed at hobbyists and nerds, while video games were trying to break into the market of casual consumers, and technical specs you couldn't easily express in terms of numbers or practical buzzwords that might have been meaningful to the average home computer user wasn't really that interesting to anyone else. The only reason Sega stressed their CPU power more than its competitors at the time (although 16-bit was used to describe the architecture in Super NES promotional material as well) was that the competitors couldn't really compete on those terms. The Super NES, for example, while more technically advanced in most other aspects had a pretty weak CPU in comparison.

I don't think the question is that relevant to consumers anymore, what with other vague metrics such as triangles per second, FLOPS, MIPS, etc. that are still probably better indicators of performance, and sort of cater to a somewhat better informed model of a consumer.

... now let's talk about blast processing big_smile

SketchMan3
Offline
NC in the US of America

8bit/fakebit music isn't even a real thing you guys rip this thread