Aphex Twin Failure Is an Option: Why Music Students Are Jealous of Aphex Twin

[Guest Masonic Boom]

Translation for the tl;dr set:

 

Richard is a big giant silver screen onto which we all project our own imaginings.

 

Which is more interesting? The screen, or the projector?

[marf]

have you even checked out his AH posts Masonic? Its mostly tech stuff, but still

[ZoeB]

...when someone who is not Mr D.James starts explaning or theorising how he makes his music, this is, basically, a piece of fan fiction. Because he pretty emphatically does not state what he does and how he does it, and deliberately obfuscates the issue with lies and disinformation. I get what you're saying - that instructions on "this is how to create a texturally similar sound" are helpful. (Though, really, why would one want to sound like someone else? I suppose it's like me and my drum sequencing questions, that I want to take something apart to see how it's made) But it's all speculation - which reveals more about the speculator than what is being speculated about. (Hence why books about "The Future" from 1950 look so strange, spaceships with fins and all that.)

 

Yes, I fully agree that it would be nice to know how James comes up with his music, and that we're not likely to find out, and that there's not much hope of being able to tell just from listening to the final result. Which brings up why I'd want to make music that's similar to his, or for that matter, why he might have wanted to make similar music to Brian Eno's or Larry Heard's.

 

I kind of envision the whole body of music as being somewhat analogous to the tree of life. Pretty much all modern music is built on top of existing music, only tweaked and modified a bit here and there to give it an interesting new spin. Eventually after making something substantially different, it can essentially be classified as being in its own new genre, or at least its own unique niche, its own little leafy branch in the tree.

 

So lately I've been thinking it would be nice to try to recreate the sound of those early "Artificial Intelligence" Warp albums, then push it in a new and different direction. You can hear similarities (at least, I think so) in, say, Selected Ambient Works 85-92 (yes, I know it was released on R&S Records) and, say, Autechre's Incunabula, but after that point Aphex Twin and Autechre drifted away from each other stylistically until they were in very different places from each other. I was hoping to try to replicate that kind of starting point and then branch out in a different direction to both of them. I think there are more interesting directions you could take that starting point than are currently being explored.

 

It wouldn't surprise me if this is also what James does, starting off with Laricheard and then putting his own spin on it enough to move it away from 80s techno and towards his own weird little world, or starting off with [Lichen] (which, incidentally, makes excellent music for an alarm clock; I'd recommend it) and using it as a starting point for his own unique ambient pieces, making wholly original music that sounds as if it belongs together with that one piece which is built on top of something else. But as you point out, this is just speculation on my part, fanfiction. :)

 

Not that that isn't interesting in itself - I'm always fascinated to learn how other artists work. Not just the big Hero figures like RDJ, but other people one interacts with. Not that actual technical "I run this patch through this FX" but more, what they're trying to achieve and why, and how they express themselves and how they translate their creativity into work. (That's sometimes even more interesting than the work.) So I guess I *do* care about how he works, because I care about how everyone works. I just would like to hear about it from him, rather than the speculation and third hand fan fiction.

 

It's also another question entirely about whether one *can* separate the artist from the art. My ex partner (who was an experimental sound artist) used to spend great amounts of effort attempting to erase himself from his art, and used to go on at great length about "subconscious self expression" <-- the idea that an artist always creates self portraits in some way, especially the more that they try to remove themselves from the equation. And it will pop up in other ways if suppressed - for example that artists, when attempting to talk about other artists' methods will often project themselves into it. (See also: one hates most in others what one fears most in oneself.) Can you separate someone like Mr D.James from his work when he seems to put so much of himself, personally into it? (Even if it's just like a graffiti artist tagging things with his name.)

 

And that brings up another layer of identity - is this Artist concept yet another simulacrum of the human being? But that's a whole nother kettle of fish entirely and this is getting way too long and too many people have x-posted in the meantime.

 

I get the feeling I should start posting on the EKT forum soon..? This would be an interesting, and in depth, discussion. I've never even considered how much my music reflects my personality... it's just emotions and patterns, the way I see it. My writing's another matter, but hopefully most people can't tell which bits are semi-autobiographical and which bits aren't. :) And yes, I'd be interested to learn how you and others go about the process of making music, or writing for that matter, as it seems you do both.

[ZoeB]

have you even checked out his AH posts Masonic? Its mostly tech stuff, but still

 

I didn't realise he posted there. It looks like someone thinks he's "panflet", but someone else disagrees. The searchable archives are now at http://search.retrosynth.com/ah/. Do you have any proof that's him? Then again, if it is and he's using a pseudonym, maybe we should just, you know, leave him alone?

[TwiddleBot]

schools don't teach you how to make 'technically correct' music. they teach you how to make 'technically correct' classical and baroque harmony and twelve-tone.

 

if you're interested in learning the mathematics and geometry of a practically dead musical language from 100+ years ago, knock yourself out. it can be useful to have an awareness of these things i guess.. some of the great jazz musicians were like genius music theorists in some ways

 

actually the only reason I went was so that I could use the studios and write music for a few years without having to work. and hopefully be exposed to a few new ideas along the way.

 

(coming from someone who went through it all--twice. royal conservatory. then university)

[Guest Masonic Boom]

have you even checked out his AH posts Masonic? Its mostly tech stuff, but still

 

I didn't realise he posted there. It looks like someone thinks he's "panflet", but someone else disagrees. The searchable archives are now at http://search.retrosynth.com/ah/. Do you have any proof that's him? Then again, if it is and he's using a pseudonym, maybe we should just, you know, leave him alone?

 

Sorry, meant to reply to you, Marf, but got distracted.

 

I lurked on AH for a bit because someone told me Sonic Booom (Spacemen 3/Spectrum/E.A.R.) posted there but a lot of it was way more technical and specific than I was at, at the time.

 

I kinda feel like if an artist wants to post to a techie forum under a pseudonym, you should kinda respect their right to be anonymous unless they choose to reveal who they are. Otherwise, again, it's speculation.

[soundwave]

has it ever occurred to anyone that he may just record loads of random studio twiddles then edit the best bits into songs in a mix n match approach? It's how a lot of electronic producers work these days.

 

 

I don't think there's any compositional genius with Mr James but more he's a very talented chappie who makes his music with a loada simple tricks and nonsense of which technology plays a great part in the creative process

[TwiddleBot]

it's possible he's used that approach on occasion. but he probably wasn't using that approach 20 years ago. even his work from 10 years ago sounds pretty deliberate to me. (and certainly not with analord). either way there's still composition involved.. percussion, notes or sfx, you still have to take your sounds and figure out how you're going to assemble and shape them from one to the next, nevermind arranging them so that your track has an overall cohesive 'color' or feel. it's the latter that appeals to me in particular more than anything else

[soundwave]

(and certainly not with analord)

 

why would you say that?

[TwiddleBot]

(and certainly not with analord)

 

why would you say that?

 

Because it's all sequenced

[soundwave]

(and certainly not with analord)

 

why would you say that?

 

Because it's all sequenced

 

so you can't edit sequences?

[TwiddleBot]

so you can't edit sequences?

 

Sure, but editing has been a standard part of compositional practice since the invention of notation. Maybe I'm missing your point..

[soundwave]

so you can't edit sequences?

 

Sure, but editing has been a standard part of compositional practice since the invention of notation. Maybe I'm missing your point..

 

record a load of busy sequenced analogues synths on tape

record the tape as hi res audio files

chop it all up on software

mix and match

 

my point being in the digital age its more about the spaces in between than what you throw on the canvas

 

if you dissect analord you'll find most of it is just short motifs all in the same key with the occasional offset hence why a load of apparently unreleased or rather new bonus tracks appeared which due to their familiar sound were obviously from the large library of audio snippets from studio sessions Mr J did a long time ago arranged into variations and new tracks

 

Do you think RDJ masterminded and preconceived the whole series on paper then painstakingly then meticulously programmed it all on an MC-8 without the help of any digital editing or rather complied a lot of cool sounding audio snipptes on his analogues when stoned in his studio then spent ages arranging and editing with his Mac later on his sofa with a good cuppa char?

[TwiddleBot]

so you can't edit sequences?

 

Sure, but editing has been a standard part of compositional practice since the invention of notation. Maybe I'm missing your point..

 

record a load of busy sequenced analogues synths on tape

record the tape as hi res audio files

chop it all up on software

mix and match

 

my point being in the digital age its more about the spaces in between than what you throw on the canvas

 

if you dissect analord you'll find most of it is just short motifs all in the same key with the occasional offset hence why a load of apparently unreleased or rather new bonus tracks appeared which due to their familiar sound were obviously from the large library of audio snippets from studio sessions Mr J did a long time ago arranged into variations and new tracks

 

Do you think RDJ masterminded and preconceived the whole series on paper then painstakingly then meticulously programmed it all on an MC-8 without the help of any digital editing or rather complied a lot of cool sounding audio snipptes on his analogues when stoned in his studio then spent ages arranging and editing with his Mac later on his sofa with a good cuppa char?

 

i do see what you mean with regards to analord and completely agree... that's why he was able to release so much material so quickly. there's very little new -content- throughout the series, just lots of variations on similar ideas

 

but i have to digress with the editing though because the techniques you are referring to have long since been done previously on paper. write down sketches on paper, snippets here and there, then later put them together while drunk out of your mind on absinthe or riding the dragon after a few puffs of O. lots of musicians have done precisely just this and long before computers. lots of compositions start as bits and pieces assembled over a period of time. and lots of prolific composers just lift or rework their own material. i'm not arguing for or against the virtue/value of working in this manner (and certainly not all composers work this way.. some do painstakingly work from beginning to end), just that it is definitely a lot older than the realm of digital editing. computers can just make this a lot quicker and easier to do

[soundwave]

so you can't edit sequences?

 

Sure, but editing has been a standard part of compositional practice since the invention of notation. Maybe I'm missing your point..

 

record a load of busy sequenced analogues synths on tape

record the tape as hi res audio files

chop it all up on software

mix and match

 

my point being in the digital age its more about the spaces in between than what you throw on the canvas

 

if you dissect analord you'll find most of it is just short motifs all in the same key with the occasional offset hence why a load of apparently unreleased or rather new bonus tracks appeared which due to their familiar sound were obviously from the large library of audio snippets from studio sessions Mr J did a long time ago arranged into variations and new tracks

 

Do you think RDJ masterminded and preconceived the whole series on paper then painstakingly then meticulously programmed it all on an MC-8 without the help of any digital editing or rather complied a lot of cool sounding audio snipptes on his analogues when stoned in his studio then spent ages arranging and editing with his Mac later on his sofa with a good cuppa char?

 

i do see what you mean with regards to analord and completely agree... that's why he was able to release so much material so quickly. there's very little new -content- throughout the series, just lots of variations on similar ideas

 

but i have to digress with the editing though because the techniques you are referring to have long since been done previously on paper. write down sketches on paper, snippets here and there, then later put them together while drunk out of your mind on absinthe or riding the dragon after a few puffs of O. lots of musicians have done precisely just this and long before computers. lots of compositions start as bits and pieces assembled over a period of time. and lots of prolific composers just lift or rework their own material. i'm not arguing for or against the virtue/value of working in this manner, just that it is definitely a lot older than the realm of digital editing. computers can just make this a lot quicker and easier to do

 

very true, what was once scribbles on lined paper is now squiggly waves on a screen but either way its still a painstaking process and one that requires a talent of some sort to make something good

 

I recently got Mr Funks 1961 album which is an amusing homage (and piss take) of analord/the tuss although the arrangements are often more intricate the production is compromised by using mainly digital so Mr James's hard work with the analogues and ear for a good melody will certainly stand the test of time

[TwiddleBot]

i'm going to have to check that out as i'm all about taking the piss

[ZoeB]

schools don't teach you how to make 'technically correct' music. they teach you how to make 'technically correct' classical and baroque harmony and twelve-tone.

 

if you're interested in learning the mathematics and geometry of a practically dead musical language from 100+ years ago, knock yourself out.

 

See, this is what I was afraid they'd be like. This is my own fault for writing something I don't know about (music lessons at universities). So most people here are saying they're better than I imagine, they give you good groundwork to build upon, and if I get this right, you're saying they're actually worse than I imagine, that they only teach out of date styles too?

 

This sounds about right from my limited knowledge of educational systems in general. I gather when I was in primary school, I learnt some dance on the side, and discovered that their idea of "modern" dance and mine were not exactly the same...

 

So do these places vary a lot, and which one you go to makes a big difference, or is it that they all teach ancient principles and everyone's got a different opinion on how much they apply to modern songwriting?

 

If I want to learn to write better music, is it worth me looking into anything formal or should I just read The Ravenspiral Guide and Alan Belkin's A Practical Guide to Musical Composition and have done with it?

[xox]

the best music comes not from thinking about it and over-intellectualising it, but from instinct and memory and the subconscious.

 

 

[Guest Masonic Boom]

To be perfectly honest, I browsed through that Ravenspiral guide that you posted, and it was pretty comprehensive in terms of telling you the basics of what you need to know. A lot of the stuff in it, if you go through it with a keyboard in front of you, you'll realise how intuitive it actually is, and how much of it just *sounds* right.

 

I don't know much about the UK system so I can't advice (I went to school in the States) but of like, interweb friends who are at UK music schools - seems like they spend a lot of time learning how to write madrigals... which is great if you want to learn that sort of thing, but I don't really see the relevance to what you want to do. It seems like the more technically oriented schools where they teach you production are much better value for money - but (again from the experiences of interweb friends) quite hard to get into.

 

I do actually think that if you just want to become a better songwriter, you're better off reading a couple of guides or maybe taking piano lessons (though having listened to a couple of your tracks on last.fm your playing is fine, it's just picking up the theory.) I don't know where you are in the UK, but in London they do short courses at the City Lit - that kind of thing would probably be of more value to you than you know, learning to write madrigals.

[ZoeB]

I do actually think that if you just want to become a better songwriter, you're better off reading a couple of guides or maybe taking piano lessons.

 

I've got an impressive looking DVD set of piano lessons, which I'm hoping are almost as good as proper one-on-one sessions (and much cheaper and far less time consuming). Unfortunately, I'll have to wait until I can afford to live somewhere that I can squeeze a proper sized keyboard into. I'm on just two octaves at the moment, which doesn't leave much room for two handed playing. Having a modular synth to play with is still quite a distant dream too, until I get a decent sized place to live...

 

I guess I'll read these guides, move house, practice for a few years and get back to you all, thanks for the help! :D

[elusive4]

i do see what you mean with regards to analord and completely agree... that's why he was able to release so much material so quickly. there's very little new -content- throughout the series, just lots of variations on similar ideas

 

 

you're carelessly misguided.

[elusive4]

 

if you dissect analord you'll find most of it is just short motifs all in the same key with the occasional offset hence why a load of apparently unreleased or rather new bonus tracks appeared which due to their familiar sound were obviously from the large library of audio snippets from studio sessions Mr J did a long time ago arranged into variations and new tracks

 

 

you're carelessly misguided

[Ragnar]

somebody said something about musical TRAJECTORIES or something and I'm sure people get it with other musicians but I think with Aphex Twin there really is a strong sense of I could really see him going with the Polygon Window sound etc. indefinitely like there is a lot of potential to explore there. When I heard about a second Polygon Window album I totally got an idea what it would sound like, it wasn't like this sort of unknown. The extra Analords were cool too but they didn't really surprise me that there were more ideas in that vein just I didn't know if he had actually composed/recorded them or not. Did anybody do any spectral analysis on Bbdhyonchord or some weird shit like that to determine if it's from ICBYD period or just revisiting the sound?

[Cryptowen]

^As far as Bbhyonchord goes, I assumed most of the complicated electronic tracks on Drukqs started off like that & kept being beefed up with more details. It just so happened that in this particular case he decided it worked well enough as a simple track & left it alone. I'm guessing this based on the fact that the demo on the Japanese Windowlicker EP sounds quite simple & nothing like the final track.

[Ragnar]

I just love the feel of that track for that reason, it's like some weird wireframe/shadowy version of an ICBYD track