So your saying you know that producers will master things deliberately at 'interesting' tempos? ... why would they do that? To make their stuff harder to mix?
one of you explain to me what it means to 'master' a track please. its being brought up a lot and its making me confused. thanks.
.... rendering it out from cubase/reason/ableton from an arrangement into an audio file. Thats how i interpret it.
great, thanks lads. and at what point does the mastering engineer have anything to do with the tempo of the track?
Older stuff was pretty much sample based - If the tempo drifts, I would have thought it's becasue the loops we're lose? If you think, the old drum machines and samplers they used didn't have a quantize function like your modern DAWs have. Other than than that, the producer has maybe added a lot of swing, or again used a loop with a lot of swing and not quantized it. 'Mastering' or 'rendering' hasn't anything to do with it.
I find this normally happens with tracks that I buy from Beatport that originally came out circa 92-98. They're blatantly high quality rips from a vinyl, probs as nobody has the original audio file after all these years, and that's why they're canny loose.
well said , ha ha , i couldnt move to cd or laptop , i just dont like buttons , plus just awaiting 550 more oldskooll records in the post - adicted i see the benifit every where i go of cd , producing software etc , but technology will 1 day fuck the world , so il play it safe and back myself into a corner .
How old are we talking... Obviously most bands recorded to tape (and some still do to get the effect). Would this be the case in dance/electronic music too? I'm guessing that's what the discussion is about, or is it music in general? Dance/electronic music is generally made to be mixed by a DJ, so why record to a tape that can have a fluctuation in tempo? Give that dance/electronic is more recent, wouldn't they use DAT if anything? Or can that have issues as well? Again, agreed on the live drummers though... But dance/ectronic would generally be sample based or on a drum machine I'd say, going back to things not being quantized.
im moving to 4 track tape soon as altenative final recording solution , starting sampling from oldskool tapes , for a real feel .
Best deck to use, if you're ripping from vinyl, is a Vestax - Seem to hold their pitch better IMO. Still won't be perfect like.
As long as that's the exact bpm throughout the whole track, and not just an average due to fluctuations in tempo, then it shouldn't drift in and out when beatmatching at all.
or you could be like Steve Reich and exploit the phase shift of two tapes like on "It's Gonna Rain" and make something interesting and new happen...... When the technology gets perfect the life goes out of the music maybe?
So surely its impossible with certain tunes, to say get them both on 123.45bpm as an example if your limited to making 0.02% pitch variations on tunes that might also be 124.56 and 121.43 for example ... (i've pulled those numbers out of nowhere by the way). So with that, unless your using something thats warping them together (traktor or ableton etc etc) and pretty much sidestepping the limitations of pitch accuracy on hardware devices, then this is going to happen sometimes and pitch bending is going to be needed. I've got fuck all experience with production, so i always assumed that producers would put tunes out at tempo's that were close to whole numbers.
In 'brave new world' and '1984' they talk about music generator machines. Im sure that once you can tag tracks with intro/outro points as well as have key detection and the like .... that mixing standard sets that most people do will actually be something you could do automatically. Of course thats all completely stupid ... the human element to DJ'ing is part and parcel of the experience, but the lines are being blurred .... even todays pop stars are for the most part just 'personalities' dancing to music they didnt write (or produce/sing in some cases ..... Milli Vanilli anyone ).
surely just moving the turntable/cdj plater/pitch once in a while to keep the tracks in time isn't a major problem?
it seems the button pushers are getting their own way which reminds me, i need to update the laptop for this weekends gigs
it just seems to me if doing the basics is a hassle then people'd be best off getting ableton and one of those posh akai controllers or similar reckon it'd be fun you could do some really creative stuff with it especially if you were a producer with all the parts to your tracks in there but personally I don't think I'd use ableton solely for mixing tunes I can do that now with a turntable or cdj or traktor set-up technical perfection is nice but not the be all and end all in my book, just look at djs like jeff mills, derrick carter, carl cox, they throw stuff in and out and as such drop beats here and there but it doesn't detract from the performance if anything for me it makes it more organic
stu, its funny you should mention djs like that, i think they're from an era where they did it for fun. they had no idea they would become superstars, or household names nowadays people just want the hands in the air glory without the boring tasks like learning to beat match or trying to discover anything new. all the tricks have seemingly been thought of and nobody wants to push the envelope any more out of fear of being different. its easier to search youtube to find out what's already been done than actually have fun and discover some new shit for yourself very sad rafik uses traktor now... [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ZOTIHMZsNA"]YouTube - DJ RAFIK freestyle on Le JAD Looper 2[/ame]