The Logic Off Topic list

> Hi all,
> I hope this falls into the category of "legal" on this board.  Just
> wanted to get some feedback on a song I completed.  If you are
> interested in listening and commenting, please go to:
>
> http://www.iamjen.com/homesickalien.html
>
> Thanks,
> NYCTHINKER

hey,

while it's not my style of music, i must commend you on a really good
balance between drums and melody.  so much pop rock music these days has the
drums so damn loud, it ruins everything.  you've got them in there just
right --> to support the other instruments/voice.  all in all, the
production is top notch by my standards...not so loud-sounding, but with a
steady volume throughout.  and some refreshing digital bits here and there
too.  good job!

bye,
jon zaremba
http://www.jonzaremba.com (music)
http://www.savetheuniverse.us (words)


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.542 / Virus Database: 336 - Release Date: 11/18/03

>  Hi all,
>  I hope this falls into the category of "legal" on this board.  Just
>  wanted to get some feedback on a song I completed.  If you are
>  interested in listening and commenting, please go to:
>
>  http://www.iamjen.com/homesickalien.html
>
>  Thanks,
>  NYCTHINKER

I usually cringe when I see these because I am usually at a loss to 
say something nice when I follow the link and hear the tune.  But I 
really got to hand it to you for a great tune and great production. 
Your voice is very androgenous (if that's you) which is actually a 
nice quality for the genre I was thinking it was a woman singing but 
the lyrics seemed to suggest a man.  Anyway I am curious what did you 
use to do the little things that sounded like a tape slowing to a 
stop at the ends of some of the phrases.

>  > Hi all,
>>  I hope this falls into the category of "legal" on this board.  Just
>>  wanted to get some feedback on a song I completed.  If you are
>>  interested in listening and commenting, please go to:
>>
>  > 
><http://www.iamjen.com/homesickalien.html>http://www.iamjen.com/homesickalien.html
>>
>>  Thanks,
>  > NYCTHINKER
>

	Very nice song writing.  Production is polished.  Nice work!
-- 
Doug

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> Hi all,
> I hope this falls into the category of "legal" on this board.  Just
> wanted to get some feedback on a song I completed.  If you are
> interested in listening and commenting, please go to:
>
> http://www.iamjen.com/homesickalien.html
>
> Thanks,
> NYCTHINKER

>hey,

>while it's not my style of music, i must commend you on a really good
>balance between drums and melody.  so much pop rock music these days has the
>drums so damn loud, it ruins everything.  you've got them in there just
>right --> to support the other instruments/voice.  all in all, the
>production is top notch by my standards...not so loud-sounding, but with a
>steady volume throughout.  and some refreshing digital bits here and there
>too.  good job!

>bye,
>jon zaremba
>http://www.jonzaremba.com (music)
>http://www.savetheuniverse.us (words)

love it! love it! love it!  Great song production, etc. if those are real drums, I am really impressed. I also am impressed by the vocals.  How many tracks? maybe you could share with us your recording teqniques. Are those just logic plug-ins?  what compression settings, etc to get such a great up front vocal sound.  
 
More importantly, I am a big power pop fan, and really enjoyed the song itself.  Reminded me of doug Powells stuff or Rick Altizier.  you should contact Not Lame.com if you want to sell your stuff through them  I would lvoe to hear more of your stuff as well.

Doug Slick wrote:
>>  > Hi all,
>>>  I hope this falls into the category of "legal" on this board.  Just
>>>  wanted to get some feedback on a song I completed.  If you are
>>>  interested in listening and commenting, please go to:
>>>
>>  >
>>
<http://www.iamjen.com/homesickalien.html>http://www.iamjen.com/homesickalie
n.html
>>>
>>>  Thanks,
>>  > NYCTHINKER
>>
>
> Very nice song writing.  Production is polished.  Nice work!

This link doesn't work. But I heard "Something" and "At the same time".

I want all your songs!!!! Where can I get them?

:-)

Gert
www.waveworld.tv

Really love your stuff!

Sounds great, realy nice production with lots of beatiful little 
details.
If I'd had to bitch about something (but this may be the old-fart part 
of me talking); go easy on the autotune..

But really great songs! Really like "At The Same Time"

Makes me feel guilty 'bout not making music at this moment.... So i'm 
outa here
cheers!

arvid.

"Dennis Gunn" wrote: 
> I usually cringe when I see these because I am usually at a loss to 
> say something nice when I follow the link and hear the tune.  But I 
> really got to hand it to you for a great tune and great production. 

  Ditto!! I was very impressed all around the board. Can we hwae some more?

  --litepipe

> This is not the point of having irrational time signatures,

nothing about 5/5 or 3/5 etc is mathematically "irrational"...

> and furthermore is an incorrect definition of 5/5. 5/5 does exist (time
> signatures are just simple maths)

time sigs are •not• maths....the top is a number (granted) but the 
bottom is a *name* - like minim or "4 or "8".
these *names* are related to each other by composer direction - a 
change from 2/4 to 2/8 does not imply a halving of the length of the 
bar.


>  as do 3/5 7/5 etc. They are not
> theoretical or open to interpretation any more than 4/4 is.

they are a kludgy way to modulate tempo.
they lose musical distinction between stuff like 5/4 and 5/8.

time sigs PLUS tempo marks are very powerful.
trying to make time sigs INCLUDE tempo marks or tempo gradations loses 
time sig functionality.

like using a piccolo to crack a nut.......

all the best

steve parker

steve parker

--- In logic-ot@yahoogroups.com, steve parker <swimorsync@n...> wrote: 
> >  as do 3/5 7/5 etc. They are not
> > theoretical or open to interpretation any more than 4/4 is.
> 
> they are a kludgy way to modulate tempo.
> they lose musical distinction between stuff like 5/4 and 5/8.
> 
> time sigs PLUS tempo marks are very powerful.
> trying to make time sigs INCLUDE tempo marks or tempo gradations loses 
> time sig functionality.
> 
> like using a piccolo to crack a nut.......
> steve parker

I think this part all depends on what kind of music you are doing. Sometimes 
writing a tempo change instead of a tuplet produces undesireable results, 
especially in groove oriented music with a single pulse throughout the song. I 
can't imagine Zappa would have used a tempo change to express the irregular 
rhythms in the Black Page with that 1/4 note kik going all the way through. I've 
never seen the score but it seems like all tuplets to me.

I think tempo change work great for rubato pieces. They are obviously much 
simpler to read than odd denomiator time sigs.

chop that beat

Teddy Kumpel

--- In logic-ot@yahoogroups.com, steve parker <swimorsync@n...> wrote:
> > This is not the point of having irrational time signatures,
> 
> nothing about 5/5 or 3/5 etc is mathematically "irrational"...
> 
> > and furthermore is an incorrect definition of 5/5. 5/5 does exist (time=

> > signatures are just simple maths)
> 
> time sigs are •not• maths....the top is a number (granted) but the 
> bottom is a *name* - like minim or "4 or "8".
> these *names* are related to each other by composer direction - a 
> change from 2/4 to 2/8 does not imply a halving of the length of the 
> bar.
> 
It is maths.
Why is the bottom number called 2? because the breve is divided by 2
Why is the bottom number called 4? because the breve is divided by 4
Why is the bottom number called 8? because the breve is divided by 8
Why is the bottom number called 16? because the breve is divided by 16

This is very basic stuff. Take a few music lessons!
> 
> >  as do 3/5 7/5 etc. They are not
> > theoretical or open to interpretation any more than 4/4 is.
> 
> they are a kludgy way to modulate tempo.
> they lose musical distinction between stuff like 5/4 and 5/8.
> 
> time sigs PLUS tempo marks are very powerful.
> trying to make time sigs INCLUDE tempo marks or tempo gradations loses 
> time sig functionality.


Except they are impossible to realise in performance without a click track.=

> 
> like using a piccolo to crack a nut.......
> 
> all the best
> 
> steve parker
> 
> steve parker

--- In logic-ot@yahoogroups.com, steve parker <swimorsync@n...> wrote:
> > This is not the point of having irrational time signatures,
> 
> nothing about 5/5 or 3/5 etc is mathematically "irrational"...
> 
> > and furthermore is an incorrect definition of 5/5. 5/5 does exist (time
> > signatures are just simple maths)
> 
> time sigs are •not• maths....the top is a number (granted) but the 
> bottom is a *name* - like minim or "4 or "8".
> these *names* are related to each other by composer direction - a 
> change from 2/4 to 2/8 does not imply a halving of the length of the 
> bar.

Sorry, missed this is the previous reply. It doesn't imply halving the bar lenght, 
because it does.

best regards,


leon

www.leonmichener.co.uk   (check the clip of xenakis if you want to hear some 5/6 
ratios)

hi teddy.
i agree that n-tuplets should be used for stuff like this.
i just don't think that time sigs should do it.
3/4 changing to 3/8 could (and frequently does) mean that the bar of 
3/8 is the *same* absolute length as the previous 3/4 - not necessarily 
twice as quick.
have a new rule that (for example) going from 4/4 to 4/5 means that the 
4/5 is always quicker loses all kinds of musical subtleties.
if someone really wants to use equal non-5-tuplet fifths then they 
should definitely not be called quarter-notes and definitely not look 
like them either.
all the best!

steve parker

firstly it is NOT an agreed classical practice - it has been advocated, 
but always disputed. (along with the representation of stuff like truly 
irrational note-lengths).

> It is maths.
> Why is the bottom number called 2? because the breve is divided by 2
> Why is the bottom number called 4? because the breve is divided by 4
> Why is the bottom number called 8? because the breve is divided by 8
> Why is the bottom number called 16? because the breve is divided by 16
>

the relationship between the numbers does not mean that those 
relationships hold in music.
if you look at something like pitch-class set theory you find that you 
have to clearly define which mathematical representations are also 
valid musical ones.
the numbers at the top are numbers.
the ones at the bottom are the *names* of particular note pictures - 
this is far more important than any relationship between say 
consecutive time sigs.

> This is very basic stuff. Take a few music lessons!

steady on girl.....

steve parker

--- In logic-ot@yahoogroups.com, steve parker <swimorsync@n...> wrote:
> firstly it is NOT an agreed classical practice - it has been advocated, 
> but always disputed. (along with the representation of stuff like truly 
> irrational note-lengths).
> 
> > It is maths.
> > Why is the bottom number called 2? because the breve is divided by 2
> > Why is the bottom number called 4? because the breve is divided by 4
> > Why is the bottom number called 8? because the breve is divided by 8
> > Why is the bottom number called 16? because the breve is divided by 16
> >
> 
> the relationship between the numbers does not mean that those 
> relationships hold in music.
> if you look at something like pitch-class set theory you find that you 
> have to clearly define which mathematical representations are also 
> valid musical ones.
> the numbers at the top are numbers.
> the ones at the bottom are the *names* of particular note pictures - 
> this is far more important than any relationship between say 
> consecutive time sigs.
> 
> > This is very basic stuff. Take a few music lessons!
> 
> steady on girl.....
> 



Yeah sorry,uncalled for. Grumpy early morning pre coffee.....
The reason however those 'note pictures' are called 'four', 'two' etc is because they are 
simple divisions of the breve.
Note pictures is more poetic tho...
apologies.

leon m



> steve parker