Jump to content

ZoeB

Knob Twiddlers
  • Content Count

    1506
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by ZoeB

  1. Necromancing this thread because I always wondered whether he used Notator or Cubase, given those were the two main MIDI sequencers on the Atari ST in the early 90s...  And it turned out (at least for Analogue Bubblebath 3 opener .215061) it was neither.  There was a more obscure MIDI sequencer on the Atari ST called Dr. T's Tiger, and he used the cut down version of that, Tiger Cub.

    On 12/1/2011 at 10:32 AM, noise said:

    a toaster

    You joke, but I happened to use a toaster in my last track...  Hell, I'm listening to .000890569 right now, and that starts off with a vacuum cleaner...

    • Like 4
  2. On 11/30/2019 at 2:13 PM, donquixote said:

    does anyone know what desk(s) Rich had in Lannerlog or Clissold?

     

    Quote

    I don't know why, but I'm anti-big mixers, for some reason. The mixer I record with at home is only about so big; it's 8-channel, and I've got a 16-channel one which is even smaller. I don't know what it is. It's got no writing on it - I found it in a second-hand shop... I think it was home-made, and some of the pots were a bit dodgy, so I've changed it around. I just really like small things. Big mixers are a rip-off. I can't imagine spending £100,000 on a mixer for 20dB less hiss. Turn the treble down at the output and you've saved yourself a hundred grand.

    From an interview in 1993.

    • Like 6
  3. I just bumped that thread saying “please” and he replied a few minutes later:

     

    “would love to sort it, unfortunately I can only do one thing at a time, so if I do that then I have to stop with making new stuff, I try to go to it when I can.”

     

    I still maintain he needs to hire an assistant to help out with things like digitising his old tracks, so he can concentrate on actually making music.

  4.  

     

     

    So can we look into crowdsourcing this like with the Caustic Window LP..?

    I tried that at the time of the CWLP, but Richard/Grant weren't interested...

     

    Thanks for asking back then, it was worth a shot!

    Yeah - I tried to convince them to do Melodies from Mars (aka CAT087) but Grant insisted Richard had 'plans' for it, and likewise for the ABB5.

     

    It's a hell of a long trip to Mars, innit?

     

    Huh, well that'll be nice if he does ever get around to it.  It's certainly a good reason for saying no to releasing the existing version, that he's hoping to make an even better version instead.

  5. He had a Roland R-8 early on (including the SN-R8-04 card for TR-808 samples, and Simmons tom as on Green Calx).  At least, that's what I'm inferring from what DRN said.  So perhaps the acoustic samples are from that too, distorted a little, with reverb from the QuadraVerb?  I'm not sure, they're not the most interesting sounds he's used...  I know he used the VCS3 a fair bit during the ...ICBYD/Ventolin era, I think for things like ring mod...  And he'd do things like flange white noise, probably with the QuadraVerb...  And he said he sampled hitting an ammo box from the inside with a wireless mic, if memory serves...  Though for nice metallic drum hits, personally I like sending a brief burst of noise to a spring reverb...  Things like ring mod can work well too...  He also sort of confirmed using an aerosol as an open hat, like in S'Express.  Just think laterally and you'll do fine.  That's all I have off the top of my head right now.

     

    I briefly had a QuadraVerb the other year, and you know what?  It was just regular effects, awkward to program through a fiddly menu.  It's not the equipment you use (or only to a certain extent, at most).  Work out what weird things you can do.  SAW 85-92 still sounds great, and that used TR-808 samples, not the real thing, and was premastered to Compact Cassette.  Make do with what you have, be creative.  Otherwise it's a cargo cult emulating the specific examples of another person's lateral thought.

  6. Crisp AF. I could tell it's hardware even I didn't know that you were into that kind of stuff. Unless it isn't hardware of course please point the way to the vst. Though there's a crispness to it that I wouldn't expect a vst to be able to emulate out of the box.

     

    What are you using exactly?

     

     

    Thanks!  Yeah, it's almost all hardware.  The only samples I used were of the Mellotron.  Everything else is my Doepfer A-100 through an AnaMod ATS-1.  (I think that's right, anyway.  I could be wrong, I've made a few more tracks since then and my memory's terrible...)

     

    What am I using exactly?  Let's see...

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    I think that about covers it!

  7. cool :D

    i especially love how it starts

    the sounds have a real nice quality to them... you can feel the electricity...

    it somehow reminded me of the music from level 1 of bionic commando for c64 (tho i went and listened to that and it's nothing like it..just something about the feel of that arp bit..)

     

    Thanks!  Some nice filtering and arpeggiating in that one...  I used to have Agent X II way back, that was a fun one too...

     

    like the overall vibe but the harmonics dont do it for me, mes a bit arrogant but could be tuned wrong?

     

    Ha, I don't think I tuned this one.  Now you mention it, I did add the choir as an afterthought, and that might be clashing with the likely out-of-tune synth...  I keep on thinking "this only has the synth in it, so if I record all the melodic parts quickly enough, I can get away without tuning it!" but then if I add any other instruments, or any more pitched synth parts the next day, that plan falls apart...  I guess I should always tune it just in case.  Good point, thanks!  (That, and this one doesn't appear to have a specific key as such...  That probably didn't help.)

     

    To test out the efficacy of this sonic weapon I located a stray fascist in the wild and played this out of my soundflask™ and they straight up died on the spot. very effective.

     

     

    Mission accomplished!

  8. This is very Monolith...  I like how warm and dreamy it is.  I'm not a big 707 fan, but that's just personal taste, heh...  And it's hard to say if the detuning's slightly overdone or not...  The arrangement ebbs and flows nicely, so you don't get bored by repetition.  It has just the right amount of depth too.  It could probably do with a B section, but that's more a critique of a whole genre...  Very nice, I like it.  It ends a bit sud--

  9. And yeah, I think I'll leave this thread, as it's much more fun to work out [Rhubarb]'s time signature (plain old 4/4, who knew?) than it is to debate whether I'm real for the hundredth time.  What's a quirky thought experiment or abstract philosophical question for some is an attempt to invalidate the existence and lived experience of others.

  10. Why that is, I don't know. What it means, I don't pretend to know either.

     

    In a world where people are divided into Default and Other, and straight men are in Default, and women and GBT men are in Other, it becomes pretty clear why straight men have hangups about being perceived as gay or bi, while straight women don't.  See also my previous comments about lesbians being assumed to "grow out of it one day" while gay men are assumed to definitely be gay, although that might also be accounted for by again things catering to a straight-male perspective, which might be egotistical enough to think that deep down he's irresistable to women regardless of our claims to the contrary.  Yikes.  This is all symptomatic of a society with deep issues.

     

    You seem to be arguing that women are objectively more attractive than men.  While we may agree that we think so, claiming this to be an objective fact seems a bit of a reach.

     

    I'm not familiar with this porn you mention, but I hear it objectifies straight women enough that many such straight women seek out gay male porn just to avoid that, even if they don't fetishise gay men, so other straight women seeking out lesbian porn for similar reasons of wanting to avoid the whole degrading aspect would make sense.  All that would prove is that there isn't enough feminist straight porn catering to the market of straight women customers, though.

  11. ...gay men in media, from my experience, are way more present than lesbians. Hell, a sit-com without a couple of gay men is a rare thing nowadays. You could make a comment about the way gay men are portrayed and all that...

     

    I think we might be talking at crossed purposes a bit here, and also have different film and TV libraries...

     

    Say I want to watch a film, and I don't specifically care about the sexuality of any of the characters.  Maybe I want to watch The Social Network, for example.  That has straight couples making out and having sex in toilets, and it has two presumably-straight women kissing for the benefit of the men watching them at Harvard, and it has no men kissing each other.  (Yes, I know it's based on a true story, art imitating life and all that.)  You pick any film or TV show in your collection, and you'll probably find it has straight people making out and/or having sex, maybe also two women, though possibly just for the male gaze, and pretty much never two men.

     

    The only example I can think of, of a show which has two guys in it who are partners and very much in love and they kiss and they even have sex, and that's not what the show is about, and it's not aimed solely at gay guys, is Sense8.  In a rather bizarre mirroring of what you usually get, they're even fetishised for the female gaze of another character.  There's similar mirroring in Jessica Jones, where a male character is a pretty idiot who one of the female protagonists has sex with, but she doesn't care about his opinion.  Those two shows have objectified men for the benefit of their female characters, and I can only imagine their assumed female audience, the same way almost all others objectify women for the benefit of their male characters and assumed male audience.

     

    There seems to be this general assumption that if two women kiss on screen, it won't deter female audience members, or if it will, no-one cares.  There doesn't seem to be such an assumption about two men kissing on screen.  It seems to be implied that that would squick straight men who are apparently so insecure they'd immediately stop watching, presumably lest they accidentally enjoy it and start questioning themselves.

     

    But hey, I don't watch many sitcoms (Silicon Valley, I guess?) so maybe most of them feature gay guys who kiss their partners just as often as the straight characters do, and who are the leads just as often.  Otherwise "gay" here sounds like it might mean "camp, funny, and single, basically celibate on camera", which doesn't sound like the same thing.  They should be gay not just in theory, but in practice, just as often as the straight characters are.

  12. But even with estrogenes your brain won't be that of a woman if you were a man before that wants to be a woman. Because there are structural differences that can't be affected by hormones. You can get close though

     

    Watch those videos, by people who know the science.  A trans woman's brain is closer to a cis woman's brain than a cis man's brain regardless of whether she's switched hormones or not, and vice versa for trans men.  That's why it's technically true but disingenuous to say that switching hormones won't make a trans woman neurologically female: she already is.  That's what being trans is.

×
×
  • Create New...