This is talk split from playlist...
Quote from: NaturalOrthodoxy on August 24, 2019, 01:42:03 PM
I've been on the fence about Sarin Snow and Blackwatch for a while, but I've just given both their most recent full lengths a more attentive listen and really enjoyed both. Blackwatch especially seems to really put effort into making a real album- varied tracks, thought put into the overall flow and dynamics, rather than a collection of similar tracks. The 'romantic' approach of the subject matter for both is very appealing too, almost reminds me of Prurient in places.
Prurient was the first thing I thought when listening Sarin Snow LP. Blackwatch CD is far more rhythmic, would lump it together with Blackhouse, some Slave State, etc. I have not been so keen on "synth" p.e. or tonal keyboard "post industrial". As expressed in many reviews, I tend to lean nowadays so much more of handmade, broken, destructive sounds. Keyboard tone with effect vocals on top is genre that works when done very well, and both these projects are basically good, but I hope they throw in more experimental approach and less of keyboards through distortion pedal or beats.
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on August 24, 2019, 03:12:12 PM
I tend to lean nowadays so much more of handmade, broken, destructive sounds.
You know you can create any sound, including those sounds with synthesizers right? Or are you actually concerned that its only good if using specific equipment?
Quote from: HONOR_IS_KING! on August 24, 2019, 08:01:34 PM
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on August 24, 2019, 03:12:12 PM
I tend to lean nowadays so much more of handmade, broken, destructive sounds.
You know you can create any sound, including those sounds with synthesizers right? Or are you actually concerned that its only good if using specific equipment?
but can synth truly capture the feel of contact mic scrapings or transistor squall or eerie field recording?
Quote from: HONOR_IS_KING! on August 24, 2019, 08:01:34 PM
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on August 24, 2019, 03:12:12 PM
I tend to lean nowadays so much more of handmade, broken, destructive sounds.
You know you can create any sound, including those sounds with synthesizers right? Or are you actually concerned that its only good if using specific equipment?
Well, if one is looking for synth sounds fine, but when with "handmade, broken, destructive sounds" I mean things like mentioned in comments related to Odal and Con-Dom releases. Think of wide variety of uses of metal junk, sand on the turntable on blank vinyl, cut & manipulated tape with concrete sound, machines, scraping, ripping sound of amplifier, unpredictable ripping electronic sounds, etc etc etc.
You can't "create" everything with synth, or if you theoretically could, the guy with microbrute ain't going to synthetize you that, hah...
Often to achieve the physical, rugged, broken and destructive sound from synth requires recording methods and circumstances that contribute to it more than synth itself.
I am 100% confident, that availability of synths and keyboards and all sorts of neat efx gadgets have made power electronics less interesting than when it was done with nearly zero "gear". And furthermore, I am quite surprised how abundance of the tech doesn't result more experimentation. Often one can hear pretty much the factory default tones and generic electronic noises that appear when you first push the button. Especially more complex synths, and those that allow you to filter external sounds, allow so vast possibilities, that I am slightly surprised how little people seem to use them and are happy with just playing "keyboards".
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on August 25, 2019, 11:40:38 AM
I am 100% confident, that availability of synths and keyboards and all sorts of neat efx gadgets have made power electronics less interesting than when it was done with nearly zero "gear".
Amen
I agree with Mikko to a large degree. All-electronics noise doesn't have the same destructive timbre as noise drawn from kinetic sources, in my experience.
Quote from: W.K. on August 25, 2019, 10:58:08 PM
But it might not (necessarily) be PE or noise for that matter.
maybe thats why people on the PE and noise forum are "dismissive" of whatever you're talking about? just a guess
Quote from: W.K. on August 25, 2019, 10:58:08 PM
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland
And furthermore, I am quite surprised how abundance of the tech doesn't result more experimentation.
I find this strange to hear from someone that rather looks for and celebrates the classic PE sound, but also seems to be dismissive of, or less caring about people doing different things that might not fall into the standardized PE boundaries. Maybe that is also the problem, looking for something that can't be there. PE sound being standardized and therefore A) little room for something that is different and B) sounds that are different and leaning too or are categorized as PE but don't have too much in common with the perception of what PE 'should be' and therefore being dismissed as something that is not good or for not being PE.
I am not dismissive of people doing different things. As one can ready probably ten thousand reviews of different things being celebrated.
What I am talking about, is not need of PE sound (or noise, post industrial in general) being standardized but
EXACT opposite. I suppose it would be clear? To my ears, a lot of bands attempt to sound like raw and ripping PE, but it won't happen with mere distorted keyboard tone and couple plugins.
Same could be observed in difference of old and new death industrial. Even dark ambient/industrial.
Synths can be used in creative ways even in context of PE. I don't see use of polyphonic ambient tones of keyboard as "creative" in same was as someone going through process of making each sound from scratch. Based on idea, research, experimentation and realization. Even if the sound is stripped down and minimalistic.
Some may say that its all just matter of taste, but I tend to disagree. Over the years, I have seen and talked with so many bands and projects, where it is clear they do not create material that matches even their own taste or music standard they would spend time to listen to. When everybody else is patting their backs, there should be few critics who can ask if this is what they're satisfied with? I have heard things like no money, no place to record, no time, no inspiration.... but you don't need money, place or time - at least not more than for making stuff they managed to do. Inspiration - that you need. You need ideas and will to prioritize. Perhaps also besides the keyboards, it is the recording on computers that standardize things. Like with synth, it doesn't necessarily
have to, but in reality it
does especially on entry level so to say.
When there was vast variety of microphones, amps, tape recorders, (tape brands even!), mixing descs... I can easily understand how it resulted diversity as opposed to bands that have pretty much same gear, recording to same digital recorder having almost the same ideas. I suppose when in past diversity came almost as by product of situation. Nowadays, when possibilities are endless, paradoxically it seems other way round.
I actually remember a discussion with a friend whose project is one of my personal favourites. He doesn't use a synth (so yeah, it's not a necessity) and said two noteworthy things. First: "yeah synths are neat, but it would just make me lazy". Second: "you can do really cool things with synths, if I had one, I wouldnt just do the standard no-change heavy Industrial throb". Pretty spot-on...
And synths are cool, especially if you want full tone with that certain harmonious (?) core. But the REALLY interesting stuff appears when you a) try around a bit and b) run it through modulations and other FX. Although I do think that using "just" a synth in PE is probably not the best way to go. It just kind of needs at least some hands-on elements.
And anyone who has ever experienced that nice full sound of live metaljunk, loud recordings with cutting feedback or the evolution of a physical loop or field recording will probably agree that a synth does not substitute those sounds. It has its own advantages and limitations.
This thread should probably be split off into its own topic before it completely derails the playlists.
This is an issue that preoccupies me a lot when I'm working. Back when I recorded under the Cauldhame name I basically had a digital recorder, a mic and a Dictaphone, and that was it; the overwhelming majority of the sounds I used were field recordings and if I wanted to have synth-like textures then I either had to search for different routes to those kind of sounds or settle for soft-synths; in practice I would often use combinations of both. One approach I used a lot was to record extractor fans and air-conditioning systems, then tune the recording and blend it with a small amount of soft-synth to gently emphasise the tones. Most of the sounds I used, full stop, were hybrid sounds of one kind or another because I struggled to get usable results with any single sound.
Since I've been able to afford a synth and to start using one regularly, I'm always a bit paranoid that some of that ingenuity and resourcefulness has been lost. I almost always introduce external audio into the synth in order to have the same kind of tension and hybridity in the signal, as just the synth on its own is not particularly exciting. Most of the time just a little bit of synth texture introduced into a larger setup is sufficient. On the flipside of this, prior to having a real synth, for all my methods I was always frustrated by the insufficiency of the sounds I had to create the feel of real analogue electronics, even if the sounds I was pursuing were less novel and unique. There's a bit of tension there between what I personally find satisfying in my own material and what I imagine other people might prefer. I guess the key thing is to keep honing extended techniques and continue trying to work against the essential homogeneity and limitations of the equipment.
When it comes to extended synthesizer technique I don't think there's been anyone better than Iron Fist Of The Sun; endless object lessons in what can be achieved by using synths creatively. Lee is going to be sorely missed.
Quote from: Cauldhame on August 26, 2019, 01:24:36 PM
When it comes to extended synthesizer technique I don't think there's been anyone better than Iron Fist Of The Sun; endless object lessons in what can be achieved by using synths creatively. Lee is going to be sorely missed.
Definitely an inspiration as far as I am concerned.
As far as I'm concerned, my main fears with using synths are 1. Sounding like a boring and inferior version of Genocide Organ, 2. Sounding thin or tiny.
I lent GO one of my synths for the last UFoI and the setting they left behind is incredible. Cold as fuck yet with enough depth to meditate on and get lost inside it.
Synths, on their own or with trickery applied, are the fucking business. End of!
synths = good
synth preset sounds = bad
on topic: np: v/a - rotten contingent cs, fieldwork
Quote from: Harvest on August 24, 2019, 08:24:34 PM
Quote from: HONOR_IS_KING! on August 24, 2019, 08:01:34 PM
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on August 24, 2019, 03:12:12 PM
I tend to lean nowadays so much more of handmade, broken, destructive sounds.
You know you can create any sound, including those sounds with synthesizers right? Or are you actually concerned that its only good if using specific equipment?
but can synth truly capture the feel of contact mic scrapings or transistor squall or eerie field recording?
You can manipulate those sounds in a much larger and aggressive form via granular synthesis. So yes, it can capture that and even more.
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on August 25, 2019, 11:40:38 AM
Often one can hear pretty much the factory default tones and generic electronic noises that appear when you first push the button.
I remember a long time ago you reviewed a Crown Of Cerberus cassette and I remember you had the feedback of "Enya tracks merely reversed in a computer" according to what you heard by your ears.
The fact is, the original CoC setup was always a cassette player for the blind, delay pedal, meat box. No computers.
So I have a very very difficult time buying into the idea that you can "hear presets and hear the exact sounds of specific synthesizers".
Quote from: HONOR_IS_KING! on May 01, 2019, 01:32:46 AM...its here to annihilate you all.
Quote from: HONOR_IS_KING! on May 09, 2019, 12:17:52 AMSTILL ABOVE ALL OF YOU
Quote from: HONOR_IS_KING! on June 20, 2019, 07:44:35 PM...I will evolve forever.
ABOVE ALL OF YOU.
Quote from: HONOR_IS_KING! on August 24, 2019, 08:01:34 PMYou know you can create any sound... with synthesizers right?
Quote from: HONOR_IS_KING! on August 26, 2019, 05:39:07 PM...the original CoC setup was always a cassette player for the blind, delay pedal, meat box.
The use of absolutes is perilous.
Quote from: Cauldhame on August 26, 2019, 01:24:36 PMThis thread should probably be split off into its own topic before it completely derails the playlists.
could title it "GET OFF MY YARD!" I'm guilty of it as well. Often.
Quote from: HONOR_IS_KING! on August 26, 2019, 05:39:07 PM
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on August 25, 2019, 11:40:38 AM
Often one can hear pretty much the factory default tones and generic electronic noises that appear when you first push the button.
I remember a long time ago you reviewed a Crown Of Cerberus cassette and I remember you had the feedback of "Enya tracks merely reversed in a computer" according to what you heard by your ears.
The fact is, the original CoC setup was always a cassette player for the blind, delay pedal, meat box. No computers.
So I have a very very difficult time buying into the idea that you can "hear presets and hear the exact sounds of specific synthesizers".
So it's not what he says but who says it ? Is it personal ? With this reply looks like. And it doesnt help this interesting debate in which i hear both sides. At the end, cause it is matter of taste / preference and it's impossible to have a definite conclusion, bottom line is it's not what you use but how you use it.
But there is a difference i see : A bad / lazy / boring synth based PE project has no chance to have personality / uniqueness. It will sound the same as others boring synth based projects. A bad one with other sound sources may has that personal touch.
I think it's possible there's a difference of perspective on this between American and Europeans. I was always bored of a lot of American noise being kinda boring white noise pedal and contact mic improv stuff so with Blackwatch I wanted to do something that was more structured around synth and in the vein of German heavy electronics
Quote from: HONOR_IS_KING! on August 26, 2019, 05:30:59 PM
Quote from: Harvest on August 24, 2019, 08:24:34 PM
Quote from: HONOR_IS_KING! on August 24, 2019, 08:01:34 PM
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on August 24, 2019, 03:12:12 PM
I tend to lean nowadays so much more of handmade, broken, destructive sounds.
You know you can create any sound, including those sounds with synthesizers right? Or are you actually concerned that its only good if using specific equipment?
but can synth truly capture the feel of contact mic scrapings or transistor squall or eerie field recording?
You can manipulate those sounds in a much larger and aggressive form via granular synthesis. So yes, it can capture that and even more.
This is exactly the point.
If original point made, was how abundance of cheap gadgets, access to cheap synths and access to cheap efx is transforming genre to quite lazy when many artists settle on what
gadget itself generates - it is of course entirely different topic compared to someone using advanced synth knowhow and tools that allow to put those ideas to reality, to archive interesting results. If we're talking about granular synthesis, where you sample some raw sound, to process it, this goes instantly back to importance to commit in making that "hand made raw material".
(That said, I personally, do not generally like granular synth stuff that is being made, almost at all. Especially when it is all about the effect sound and barely the raw material. I am fully aware one can use it in good ways, but when I hear it, I generally do not like what is done with it. Not much in electro-acoustic etc, even less in context of PE)
Quote from: W.K. on August 26, 2019, 11:43:02 PM
I know you have a lot of knowledge about PE, yet when you talk about synth PE "polyphonic ambient tones" or "distorted keyboard tone and couple plugins" are the first thing that comes to mind? Don't you see how that is dismissive? It's all a matter of taste and as a man of synthesizers, we are not going to agree on this one.
As said above, if we're talking about things I perceive as negative effects, that abundance of synths these days have caused, those are what I do think are the major problems in context of PE or industrial in general.
Someone who has heard my own work, could probably see that I am no synth hater, as vast majority of the stuff uses synth. In fact, even latest published work, Grunt "Kraniometria", there is ZERO moments where synth would
not be there. There is barely other things. I recall one distortion pedal and one echo.
So could be summed:
Quote from: collapsedhole on August 26, 2019, 02:59:45 PM
synths = good
synth preset sounds = bad
After re-launch of MS-20, it has been many times discussion with friends. When you hear someone buying MS-20 and then hear what they are doing with it, I am surprised how many times one won't use it to things monotron wouldn't be able to do. Then, by default, it is just the gadget. It could be used for SO much, but often feels PE bands would do actually better without out it if they have no idea or will to even test what it can do beyond the basic default oscillation.
Hah Mikko, you just posted my thoughts exactly before I finished writing my reply due to arriving to work.
I know people who use 3 Monotrons on stage. They could buy one interesting lesser known synth with different and more original sound personality (and sturdier outputs) for that money instead.
I think laziness from people also comes from the fact they don't take the time to think, analyse and process what makes such and such artists good. "GO and Haus Arafna have MS20, let's all buy one!" But they forget these guys know how to build great patches and this is where the MS20 shines. But the patch learning curve is steep and most people don't put efforts into learning that. It's like everyone jumping to buy Minilogues or Minibrutes. Yes, they're cool when you know how to use them. But with some more investigation you'd realise there are some killer Russian or Italian (or even American) synths from the 80's that cost the same price and won't make you sound as generic as everyone else if you care to learn how to use them.
And I dislike granular synthesis too. It's subjective but I'll turn off whatever I hear that I suspect use granular synthesis most of the time because I don't like the textures it creates in general.
is this topic specifically referring to modern, small budget synths? asking because for me, synth is pretty important part of PE, at least? it doesn't have to be there, and i personally really like the use of scrap metal, feedback and other "harsh-noisey" techniques... but when i think whitehouse, i think synths, when i think GO, i think synths, etc... when speaking about prurient/this other american rhytmic stuff, isn't it more a question of synth wave-inspiration... ? just some thoughts, since my personal favourites in PE are very synth-heavy, for example "powerhungry" by OC... but i guess the impression its not THAT kind of synth work youre talking about here..?
Had a bit of a listen to both the Sarin Snow and Blackwatch releases. Basic synth tones with vocals over them. In Blackwatch's case, some rhythm. The actual synth tones themselves are nice, could do well in the live sphere. Both releases well recorded, lots of drama around the pacing, use of vocals, etc.
There's nothing wrong with these releases per se but for mine they seem to lack some kind of initial individual impact. But it's definitely down to the synth patches they're using. The sounds coming from these releases just seem to me unengaging. Elementary. Too careful, too contrived, too clean. It's not that there's anything wrong with them. For me, there's a lack of immediacy and aggression. Can't put it any other way.
Listening now to Blackwatch's "Unlock the Heroic Blood". All the elements are there - the synth tone, startling acoustic (?) banging, effected vocals - that synth tone, I dunno - sounds too - I don't know how to put it. Even turning it up, even when the flange comes in - it just doesn't seem to be a base on which to rest a piece on.
Sarin Snow, "Saint George" - really doesn't sound very different from the opening track "Within Oak". In fact it's almost the same synth tone. In fact it's pretty much the same synth tone right throughout the entire album. With scant variation. Is that like the same guitar tone on a rock/Metal/punk album? Personally, I don't think so, but obviously others think different, so there it is.
These projects are doing PE their own way for their own crowd. But that doesn't mean criticism of them should be met with some kind of over-reaching "what's wrong with synths?!" knee jerk. This is fucking Noise/Industrial/Power Electronics, we all fucking love synths! That's not the issue. The issue is what you do with them.
Quote from: Theodore on August 27, 2019, 04:19:13 AM
Quote from: HONOR_IS_KING! on August 26, 2019, 05:39:07 PM
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on August 25, 2019, 11:40:38 AM
Often one can hear pretty much the factory default tones and generic electronic noises that appear when you first push the button.
I remember a long time ago you reviewed a Crown Of Cerberus cassette and I remember you had the feedback of "Enya tracks merely reversed in a computer" according to what you heard by your ears.
The fact is, the original CoC setup was always a cassette player for the blind, delay pedal, meat box. No computers.
So I have a very very difficult time buying into the idea that you can "hear presets and hear the exact sounds of specific synthesizers".
So it's not what he says but who says it ? Is it personal ?
It's always personal. Anything less would be...
civilized.
Quote from: Andrew McIntosh on August 27, 2019, 03:58:24 PM
Had a bit of a listen to both the Sarin Snow and Blackwatch releases. Basic synth tones with vocals over them. In Blackwatch's case, some rhythm. The actual synth tones themselves are nice, could do well in the live sphere. Both releases well recorded, lots of drama around the pacing, use of vocals, etc.
There's nothing wrong with these releases per se but for mine they seem to lack some kind of initial individual impact. But it's definitely down to the synth patches they're using. The sounds coming from these releases just seem to me unengaging. Elementary. Too careful, too contrived, too clean. It's not that there's anything wrong with them. For me, there's a lack of immediacy and aggression. Can't put it any other way.
Listening now to Blackwatch's "Unlock the Heroic Blood". All the elements are there - the synth tone, startling acoustic (?) banging, effected vocals - that synth tone, I dunno - sounds too - I don't know how to put it. Even turning it up, even when the flange comes in - it just doesn't seem to be a base on which to rest a piece on.
Sarin Snow, "Saint George" - really doesn't sound very different from the opening track "Within Oak". In fact it's almost the same synth tone. In fact it's pretty much the same synth tone right throughout the entire album. With scant variation. Is that like the same guitar tone on a rock/Metal/punk album? Personally, I don't think so, but obviously others think different, so there it is.
These projects are doing PE their own way for their own crowd. But that doesn't mean criticism of them should be met with some kind of over-reaching "what's wrong with synths?!" knee jerk. This is fucking Noise/Industrial/Power Electronics, we all fucking love synths! That's not the issue. The issue is what you do with them.
My original post wasn't meant to be addressing Sarin Snow etc as a problem. As honestly, there is much more to their album than just
pre-set synths. This was merely starting point of discussion as it happened to be in playlist at that particular moment.
Sarin Snow album is recorded pretty well. Synth work is pretty clean, but there are other elements too that display sense of sound and atmosphere. Vocals are not typical at all. It's quite rare to hear such pitch-shifted demonic roars. Especially in live setting (where I first heard the project), quite unexpected. In live setting, subtle details of synth were barely to be observed. It would have required heavier PA system. Rather epic moment in set was playing
Miserere mei, Deus, moderately distorted, for the end of set.
I would suspect they don't aim to be ripping or raw. Same as something like Alberich, which is good and deserves the praise, but a bit too synth-wave-esque in the sonic quality (not the composition) to my personal taste. I can appreciate bands who do have some compositional sense and ear for the sound they're looking after.
It's entirely different thing when you hear the stuff I mean, heh. Unfortunately, I won't be name dropping here. It wouldn't be very fruitful situation.
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on August 27, 2019, 09:35:40 AM
If we're talking about granular synthesis, where you sample some raw sound, to process it, this goes instantly back to importance to commit in making that "hand made raw material".
(That said, I personally, do not generally like granular synth stuff that is being made, almost at all. Especially when it is all about the effect sound and barely the raw material. I am fully aware one can use it in good ways, but when I hear it, I generally do not like what is done with it. Not much in electro-acoustic etc, even less in context of PE)
I would be interested in what you've heard/haven't.
You probably haven't heard anyone replicate the sounds of metal out of synthesizer tones via granular synthesis.
But then again I could understand how that might be a bit too complex/a little too over your head to comprehend/ might dare I say you are too lazy to take the time to learn how to make it work.
Also I'm going to say it again, you don't have the ear you think you do. Point brought up earlier is not personal. I have never given a solitary shit about what anyone thinks of my material. But you claim to have the ears to "hear presets" and pinpoint them to synths is a crock if you are claiming a release was all done on computer when it wasn't.
The only thing "lazy" in this topic are the ones too "lazy" to explore those possibilities.
Quote from: HONOR_IS_KING! on August 27, 2019, 06:23:48 PM
Also I'm going to say it again, you don't have the ear you think you do. Point brought up earlier is not personal. I have never given a solitary shit about what anyone thinks of my material. But you claim to have the ears to "hear presets" and pinpoint them to synths is a crock if you are claiming a release was all done on computer when it wasn't.
That can happen, due the fact that there are analogue material that manages to escape all the positive aspects associated with analogue recordings. I am slightly curious what the release in question would be that I may have misjudged?
Edit:
ah, I realize it now. We are still talking about the years old tongue in a cheek comment about Crown Of Cerberus tape. Talk about
not caring what people say about your work... uh..
To see if mental image of Enya reversed was utterly unthinkable, I believe it was this tape, one can check material here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YmEqVVXwUjg
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on August 25, 2019, 11:40:38 AM
You can't "create" everything with synth, or if you theoretically could, the guy with microbrute ain't going to synthetize you that, hah...
I've been creating animal vocal sounds and disturbing humanoid screams using just the Korg DS-10 on the Nintendo DS. :D But yes, tooo many people are satisfied to dial in some generic SICK BASS DRONE DUDE and tape a couple of keys down. They don't even know that putting a Rizla packet across the neighboring keys is a far better way, for that matter.
I used clothes pegs! Very handy!
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on August 27, 2019, 06:11:05 PMMy original post wasn't meant to be addressing Sarin Snow etc as a problem. As honestly, there is much more to their album than just pre-set synths. This was merely starting point of discussion as it happened to be in playlist at that particular moment.
I know that was the starting point for this topic (which is quite interesting so far). I just thought I'd have a listen and thought, yea, funny - nothing quite stirring about those recordings, and the patches/tones of the synths really are to blame. Not what I'm used to from PE, anyway. So if they're the tip of the iceberg I'm not inclined to want to listen to anything else you'd be thinking of. Maybe Sarin Snow would be okay live but I'll never see them live of course. A big loud pa makes all the difference anyway.
I quite revel in plain, unadorned synth tones, such as they are presented in work from artists like eleh, Calineczka, etc. But that's more for home, late night listening. If I'm going to listen to PE I want something that's going to wake me up.
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on August 25, 2019, 11:40:38 AM
Well, if one is looking for synth sounds fine, but when with "handmade, broken, destructive sounds" I mean things like mentioned in comments related to Odal and Con-Dom releases. Think of wide variety of uses of metal junk, sand on the turntable on blank vinyl, cut & manipulated tape with concrete sound, machines, scraping, ripping sound of amplifier, unpredictable ripping electronic sounds, etc etc etc.
...
I am 100% confident, that availability of synths and keyboards and all sorts of neat efx gadgets have made power electronics less interesting than when it was done with nearly zero "gear". And furthermore, I am quite surprised how abundance of the tech doesn't result more experimentation. Often one can hear pretty much the factory default tones and generic electronic noises that appear when you first push the button. Especially more complex synths, and those that allow you to filter external sounds, allow so vast possibilities, that I am slightly surprised how little people seem to use them and are happy with just playing "keyboards".
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on August 26, 2019, 09:11:07 AM
When there was vast variety of microphones, amps, tape recorders, (tape brands even!), mixing descs... I can easily understand how it resulted diversity as opposed to bands that have pretty much same gear, recording to same digital recorder having almost the same ideas. I suppose when in past diversity came almost as by product of situation. Nowadays, when possibilities are endless, paradoxically it seems other way round.
I think this is a really interesting critique to articulate. I pulled a couple of Mikko's comments that I thought were totally on point and some things that have definitely crossed my mind in the past few years. You can take synths and make many interesting sounds whether deep, complex patches or minimal, but as has been stated, many of us can often hear when a Monotron has been used, and then some times that's all you can hear, and I would assume that these out of the box sounds stand out to others who have used them. How many recordings will have the sound of a redlined behringer mixer sent hot right into Audacity/etc? But even in that constraint, there are those that bring new sound to the mix and stand apart. This may be more characteristic of harsh noise recordings this decade, but I think the same thinking applies do to ease/access creating a kind of standardization of sounds.
I don't think anyone's arguing they could pass the pepsi challenge of Microkorg presets or Behringer mixer clipping blasts, but I can see (that massive abundance of (and access to) gear and ease of recording/editing has resulted in many more projects producing but not an equivalent fraction creating new exciting sounds that inspire.
It's apt that Con-Dom was used as a positive example of sound sources in this discussion- I've always thought that the field recordings on Eighth Pillar (distant machinery, GX's whipping loop, close water sounds) are far more rugged and hard than the actual synth sounds in the album. some of them seem to barely have effects, and I thought the immediacy of an almost raw field recording with vocals over it is a really underused feature in PE, at least in my experience. would love to know of other artists employing this approach- i thought that Cauldhame's reply of layering field recordings in lieu of synth was really interesting and definitely will redefine how i listen to that project.
IMO comes down to quality of ideas and not gear or complexity of technique etc. Many times i've done some convoluted "cool" process of plugging old things in incorrectly or destroying some such object with a contact mic taped to it, many times these sessions yield stories and pictures that are more interesting than the sounds. "Experimentation" implies the risk of failure, and when my experiments fail I don't use them. i'm not interested in "experimental electronics" for its own sake. Similarly, with synths, I find a simple hard-hitting patch with little modulations most effective. "Lazy," then, in a performative sense, because it involves very minute twiddling of knobs :)
Perhaps my personal bar is quite low, but I think power electronics in particular is as good now as it's ever been. Standardization of process is a risk, but people driven by ideas and passion will find ways to innovate their process over time, unlike say hardcore or death metal where the process is fairly rigid. Sometimes when you "do something different," it sucks.
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on August 27, 2019, 08:53:45 PM
We are still talking about the years old tongue in a cheek comment about Crown Of Cerberus tape. Talk about not caring what people say about your work... uh..
Tongue in cheek was missed because your English like your ears is not as succinct as you think. If that was meant as tongue in cheek like you say now then so be it.
I'm more interested in the convo originally started though.
What have you artists and their releases listened to that features granular synthesis and you didn't like it? Especially because you have stated you know what that sound is exactly. Or were you stating that tongue in cheek as well?
Quote from: Euro Trash Bazooka on August 28, 2019, 12:08:15 AM
I used clothes pegs! Very handy!
I use these climbing plant pegs on my monotron, they have a better reach than standard pegs and they have quite a tight spring so you can put a bit of rubber down to avoid key / ribbon damage.
(https://www.burpee.com/dw/image/v2/ABAQ_PRD/on/demandware.static/-/Sites-masterCatalog_Burpee/default/dwf7426c44/Images/Product%20Images/prod500517/prod500517.jpg?sw=320&sh=378&sm=fit)
Quote from: Lysergikon137 on August 28, 2019, 07:58:05 PM
Quote from: HONOR_IS_KING! on August 28, 2019, 06:57:31 PM
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on August 27, 2019, 08:53:45 PM
We are still talking about the years old tongue in a cheek comment about Crown Of Cerberus tape. Talk about not caring what people say about your work... uh..
Tongue in cheek was missed because your English like your ears is not as succinct as you think. If that was meant as tongue in cheek like you say now then so be it.
I'm more interested in the convo originally started though.
What have you artists and their releases listened to that features granular synthesis and you didn't like it? Especially because you have stated you know what that sound is exactly. Or were you stating that tongue in cheek as well?
Are you really getting your panties in a bunch because the power electronics legend made a joke about your twinkly ambient side project?
I'm not a fan of the projects mentioned in OP, but I do enjoy "lazy synth" power electronics such as Myrrh and Pleasure Island. Crown of Cerberus is FAR too hi fi and "guitar pedal bro" sounding for even my tastes.
Your rage is kinda cringe bro.
I'm talking about how I disproved his ears. He goes on and on about how he hears these particular sounds and when I have proof everyone wants to make it like its my personal attack when really I would have much prefered to use another review to showcase my point, but I only have mine. So tough shit. So since I didn't catch the joke at all and have moved on like I said, I'm still awaiting to hear his examples of granular synthesis that he's heard. I'm trying to have a discussion on that. Granular synthesis employed in releases, not about a release I did years ago. Do you know anything about that stuff yourself or are you into becoming a "PE legend" with some guitar pedals?
The fact that you call him a "PE legend" makes me cringe even harder because I don't make idols out of people. That's for weak minded individuals. On top of that you sound like a basement dwelling kvlt nerdball saying that.
Fanboy dork ass mark.
Quote from: HONOR_IS_KING! on August 29, 2019, 07:06:28 AM
I'm talking about how I disproved his ears. He goes on and on about how he hears these particular sounds and when I have proof
I assume you mean the proof that joke about one particular tape being referred
Enya reversed, is representative how technical aspects of material was heard?
You do not have to ridicule yourself further. There is the general guideline in forum that
less drama, more noise. So I assume we can already drop this subject?
Quote from: HONOR_IS_KING! on August 29, 2019, 07:06:28 AM
I'm still awaiting to hear his examples of granular synthesis that he's heard. I'm trying to have a discussion on that. Granular synthesis employed in releases, not about a release I did years ago.
There could be granular synth talk in the tech section for example. Or best granual synth releases on the main page. It has very little to do with topic what was in hand here, which was critique of lazy synth.
Preset sounds may be misleading on some cases, one could call it rather
default sound? Imagine someone unboxing korg MS-20. He plugs in the power cord, pushes first button and
power electronics emerges. No joke. And that is what he will use for first track he makes, with delay pedal vocals on top. That is the impression one gets listening some things. Gadget default sound as core of sound. Not experimental recording methods, not as one element that is enhancing tasty sound combinations. Some take couple steps, making it ok. While there would be miles to walk to get it beyond "I had fun doing this" level.
Granular, as said before, would have a starting points that has quite advantage for it. Not only you can load your own sounds to process, but also it allows you to do things that are not possible or would be extremely difficult in analogue process. When I first had seen stand-alone hardware version of one of granular synths, it did seem interesting. When I heard what it really does, I was no longer interested.
My exposure for granular synth probably started by hearing works of Xenakis, who was using tape manipulation to achieve that already back in 50's. Not my favorite sounds of his. After popularity of digital granular synth process, you simply get to hear it anywhere. As being avid listener of experimental music broadcasts in Finland, you tend to be exposed to other things than "underground noise" as well. I do not memorize their names and buy their albums. Yet, have learned to appreciate some of methods due their possibilities and concluding noise and power electronics would benefit from experimental approach to sound. Which is basically what topic was suggesting. It did not suggest yet, but I have said it many times elsewhere, that broader experimental art music would have shitloads to learn from noise & industrial.
All that said, if you would have had time to check out actual reviews, you would probably see taste that has consistency that tends to reject all the usual kaoss pad sounds. Digital glitch art. All sorts of stutter electronics. digital time stretching, digital pitch bending, etc etc. Tends to not praise basic synth pad. Neither I am fan of fat and colossal synths, resembling pretty usual soundtrack music or synth wave. All these elements, may just about to work within context of bigger thing. Yet even notable names run themselves quickly to corner with relying on too much on those things.
In context of power electronics, where for example I look for ripping and raw sounds, the effects provided by granular synth generally adds merely goofy twist. In contexts of electro acoustic, it is less so, but usually still results "aaargh, not again". In the genre of broken beats, soft ambient, IDM, etc. it's perfectly fine.
But I assume the real question here is asking did I hear the great things you have done with granular and the related efx things? For example Terror Cell Unit. Yes I have. No worries. I am aware of the skills.
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on August 29, 2019, 09:27:15 AM
But I assume the real question here is asking did I hear the great things you have done with granular and the related efx things? For example Terror Cell Unit. Yes I have. No worries. I am aware of the skills.
There's barely any "granular synth" use in Terror Cell Unit. But I'm glad you hear it everywhere these days.
No drama or grudges on my end Mikko. I appreciate you taking the time to respond as always. Always respected the fact that you're down to converse versus shutting down or locking a thread.
Granular synth : the ghost in the house. Some say it is good, some it is nasty, but ... nowhere to be seen. Haha, this is getting funny. Sorry, ignore me, continue ...
Though tangential to this thread, on the subject of criticism... I would guess that anyone who has released at least a few things into the public sphere has been the recipient of criticism (or praise!) that they would have felt to be off the mark. Likewise anyone who has offered more than a few criticisms in the public sphere has doubtless been the recipient of both more and less politely worded queries as to what they were smoking.
I'd say, it's often difficult to parse what, exactly, grabs me, as listener. Or what may fail in that uh grabbing capacity. (Bar the requisite molestations via metal whanging on metal!) But speculation on the subject is still, for me, an endless source of fascination.
Quote from: Theodore on August 29, 2019, 05:29:13 PM
Granular synth : the ghost in the house. Some say it is good, some it is nasty, but ... nowhere to be seen. Haha, this is getting funny. Sorry, ignore me, continue ...
Clouds is probably the most sold module in Eurorack ever (with Maths) and it's a granular synth.
Talking granular,
I purchased this pedal and it is lush. Wasn't cheap but it is very versatile.
Has 16 different granulation algorithms plus feedback / looping effects.
Love it. Can be used very subtly or full on obvious.
(https://fuzzmonster.dk/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Pladask-Elektrisk-FABRIKAT.jpg)
(https://fuzzmonster.dk/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Pladask-Elektrisk-FABRIKAT-bottom.jpg)
Uses found so far, for example,
Create a drone with your clothes peg on the monotron then use program B2.5 and long loops to form this ever evolving weird pitched drone. Modulate the feedback and create multiple layers of different pitched drone sounds.
I still don't know what granular synthesis is. Don't think I care either.
Always the talk of "lazy PE", which I find quite lazy. What about lazy generic piss awful noise? Why does that always get a free pass?
Quote from: GEWALTMONOPOL on August 30, 2019, 07:41:11 PM
I still don't know what granular synthesis is. Don't think I care either.
Always the talk of "lazy PE", which I find quite lazy. What about lazy generic piss awful noise? Why does that always get a free pass?
I also do not have a fucking clue what granular synthesis is. Sounds itchy...
Granular synthesis means that you take an audio signal (generally a waveform but that can even be a sample) , split it in slices that last a certain number of milliseconds (called grains, hence granular synthesis), and put them back together in a different order, or on top of each other. And it makes a processed sound that's different from the one it's supposed to sound like.
I think it can sound great but most people make it sound like crap to my ears so I never use it.
Quote from: GEWALTMONOPOL on August 30, 2019, 07:41:11 PM
I still don't know what granular synthesis is. Don't think I care either.
Always the talk of "lazy PE", which I find quite lazy. What about lazy generic piss awful noise? Why does that always get a free pass?
Rehash of the same response to the same complaint from I believe the same person: semantics.
Call it noise, beat the critics to the punch. Power electronics, well, you got that name to live up to.
edit
Blame Willy (aka Juntaro's dick), call it even?
The distinction of power electronics vs noise is hardly semantic.
Quote from: Euro Trash Bazooka on August 30, 2019, 10:30:46 PM
Granular synthesis means that...
Thanks for the explanation. I assume there are multitudes of software available that'll do it by the click of a mouse now.
i really had no idea what it was either. interesting, i guess.
when i heard the term here, i had some vague memory of a buddy of mine back in highschool (~20 years ago) zooming in on .wav files in a .wav editing program to the point that they were just dots, and cutting and pasting segments only a few dots/miliseconds in length... though his result after endless nights of doing this was some clicking type sound which he used in a project that sounded like a mix between early front line assembly and autechre... i feel like what you guys are talking about matches that concept but it apparently makes "all types of sounds"....? i didn't know there were pedal type gadgets that did such a thing, i don't comprehend how they can do that to a live signal, and personally i cannot at all imagine what this would sound like.
Quote from: Euro Trash Bazooka on August 30, 2019, 10:30:46 PM
Granular synthesis means that you take an audio signal (generally a waveform but that can even be a sample) , split it in slices that last a certain number of milliseconds (called grains, hence granular synthesis), and put them back together in a different order, or on top of each other. And it makes a processed sound that's different from the one it's supposed to sound like.
I think it can sound great but most people make it sound like crap to my ears so I never use it.
Is this something that is usually done manually, or are there programs that do the cutting and pasting for you? I have never heard of granular synthesis before either, but would now like to give it a try.
Quote from: Balor/SS1535 on August 31, 2019, 05:39:59 PM
Quote from: Euro Trash Bazooka on August 30, 2019, 10:30:46 PM
I think it can sound great but most people make it sound like crap to my ears so I never use it.
Is this something that is usually done manually, or are there programs that do the cutting and pasting for you? I have never heard of granular synthesis before either, but would now like to give it a try.
Soundgrain and Hourglass are free standalone apps with a lot of features (esp Hourglass) and if used in non-trivial ways can give interesting results. But there are pedals and Eurorack modules too. Being a digital process, using a computer seems to me the most straightforward.
Granulation, as well as other academic techniques like spectral processing, are used in SM/DP : Fault-Tolerant System , a side project by the man behind Umpio. http://www.umpio.com/nekorekords/ Like most of his stuff, this is excellent work.
I don't know the pedal above but I assume, since there's a loop control on it, that you can record a loop that the different knobs dismantle as you tweak them.
Quote from: Cementimental on August 27, 2019, 11:27:55 PM
I've been creating animal vocal sounds and disturbing humanoid screams using just the Korg DS-10 on the Nintendo DS.
[/quote]
Can u elaborate on this? You are able to process voice through this setup?
Nope just managed to synthesise some really vocal-like sounds using very limited means
Quote from: NIT on August 31, 2019, 09:13:36 PM
Quote from: Cementimental on August 27, 2019, 11:27:55 PM
I've been creating animal vocal sounds and disturbing humanoid screams using just the Korg DS-10 on the Nintendo DS.
Can u elaborate on this? You are able to process voice through this setup?
[/quote]
You can also create vowel-like sounds on a synth by simulating the acoustic resonance of the human voice using (generally) resonant bandpass filters. It's called formant synthesis.
Quote from: GEWALTMONOPOL on August 30, 2019, 07:41:11 PM
What about lazy generic piss awful noise? Why does that always get a free pass?
I think there is / was quite a lot of talk about that. I have been perhaps even too vocal about my dislike towards "HNW". Not the *good* HNW, but the stuff that feels 100% generic and lazy. Not sure if I have anymore
more criticism to give, what have not been said before. Most would be almost same that is expressed in this topic in context of PE.
I think those who want to see and hear, how granular synth stuff happens, check for example:
Crusher-X demonstration, which should be giving pretty good examples of how it works with "electro acoustic" / movie sound effect type of stuff:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=7&v=2FEGemYyglQ
There is demo version of this synth to download from company site: https://www.accsone.com
Hardware version for those who don't work with computer screens could be GR-1. There are others too, smaller, and more complex and bigger ones too. Usually less interesting droning sounds or dance beats are used as sample:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYRCIcnGnbc
If people feel like going deeper into this technology, perhaps topic in gear part of forum? Even if I can pretty much say that I do not like what I have heard done with it, there are some elements in this gear that I would be curious to try out few things.
Quote from: teenagelightning on August 31, 2019, 09:49:05 AM
The distinction of power electronics vs noise is hardly semantic.
Not sure anyone suggested that. It was more how a "get out of criticism free" card might be played wrt the one and the other (notwithstanding the questionable defense of such a play). Plus, I'm not sure I agree with the original complaint. There's always been plenty of criticism to go around (I thought).
But now that you mention it, I suppose it can be. Macro or Sickness call what they do "harsh power electronics", no one bats an eye*. Pittsburgh PA later earns honorary Canon Of PE status. Maybe there's another card you can play. The "do it well enough, call it whatever you damn well like" card.
*I suppose if there were any issues there, may I suggest the designation of an exciting new genre: "Harsh It's Free Country Motherfuckers Electronics"
Personally, I don't care what genre tags are given to a sound.
They can help to give me an understanding of what to expect before I listen, but If I enjoy it then that is the best metric.
==
Give 10 people the same ingredients to bake a cake, they will all look and taste different and not all be to your liking.
Any kind of synthesis works well for noise, it's all subjective. I also guess most people who use synths to make noise don't know what kind of synthesis they use to make what they do, which is fine. Sometimes it's not necessary to know something to use it. Like, I love that I cn indulge in making noise because I can create something without theorising much about the tools I use.
But for instance, I've been thinking a lot about how I could make generative noise lately, or how I wish I could make some noise with a Buchla synth (which I plan to get at some point and which uses a different kind of synthesis from the one we're used to.) Now theorising about synthesis and how we can use it gets good. But in the end it's always a matter of personal tastes.
Quote from: Euro Trash Bazooka on September 05, 2019, 03:38:23 PM
But in the end it's always a matter of personal tastes.
It does tend to come down to that doesn't it? And where for that matter it tends to come from. This whole discussion was born not out of a boring nuts n bolts gear/tech/etc discussion but out of the juicier comments/reviews. Call it criticism, or maybe call it semantics, eg call it the distance between what you feel (as good) and what you try to express (in words, as good). In there, you'll get questions as to what is generating the feel or lack thereof. In there the attempt to isolate what is worthy of criticism / praise / respect / dismissal. One listener doesn't feel it and duly assigns a culprit, eg "lazy synths". And is duly taken to task.
But really baby. It's not you, it's me. Why does (generic piss awful noise) always get a free pass? I have my read. Which I wouldn't necessarily say I'm trying to privilege. But which starts somewhere in the distance between accepting the rhetoric at face value and making a dumb-ass joke.
Anyway. Maybe we should start listing all the various forms of synthesis, and assigning a score (or opinion). It's all subjective right? Granular: 3.5 / 10 (going by this discussion).
How many established forms of synthesis are there?
Eddie Van Halen had a cool sense for synths. He might have even been able to make great soundtracks for movies. He had that Escape from New York and Halloween II vibe. Check out "Sunday Afternoon in the Park".
Quote from: Zeno Marx on October 30, 2020, 10:37:00 PM
Eddie Van Halen had a cool sense for synths. He might have even been able to make great soundtracks for movies. He had that Escape from New York and Halloween II vibe. Check out "Sunday Afternoon in the Park".
Supposedly he used Oberheim OB-Xa/Oberheim OB-8 & rumor/gossip he owned original EHX Minisynth EH0400...
http://www.vintagesynth.com/misc/eh_minisynth.php