Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The thing is, if EDM's trained probably two generations of producers, DJs and listeners to distinguish the quality of beats based on inhuman, machinelike perfection, you can't really roll that back and try to groove with fallible humans and call that better. So 'canned' only means 'created properly, at leisure, to produce an artifact that's ideal'.

You can manipulate elaborate networks of machines and some of the trance guys are very into that, and it takes a different type of skillset. I've got some ideas on how to incorporate live musical performance into this kind of bionic music flow, but it's important to understand most people won't respond positively to a 'human element' tacked awkwardly onto a machine beat: you need very practiced humans to fit into a context like that, and you need very practiced humans to put together a 'Daft Punk' type human context that grooves as hard as the machines.

And if you work that hard on the human groove it leaves no time to be innovative in the tonal/arrangement zone that EDM absolutely requires, so you end up being like 'wow that's good retread funk' but the real progress is being made elsewhere, in areas you can't really reach.

It's interesting. But just as you can't undistort the electric guitar, you can't un-rhythm the quantized robot rhythm. I'm actually fascinated and delighted with what's been done in trance and psytrance: it's not JUST robot rhythm, it's a very carefully crafted and incredibly demanding thing with no margin for error. You can put a-rhythmic texture stuff across it all you like, but you just can't 'play an instrument' as part of that mix, the timing is way way too tight.



I agree, the timing is way too tight, only master level musicians can approach it. Though they can.

Having grown up listening, and producing, rock music, and related forms, I find the rigid timing of EDM to be unpleasant. Except for occasional dancing, where it seems to work well.

So I don't see it as "correct" timing, just a different feel.

There was a real shift once the music started being produced in the computer, and you could repeat, bit for bit, chunks of audio.

This contrasts heavily with a lot of the best Hip-Hop production of the 90s. I'm thinking of groups like Public Enemy. Because of the nature of the production tools, the timing on their sample based music is inherently "loose."

I have a theory that part of what makes music/art interesting is the ability to perceive how an artist engaged with the limitations of their medium.

Prior to DAWs, having music that was precise, and had precise repetition was hard. Artists often did try, and achieve, some very tight productions, but it was an effort. The effort happens at a boundary, which is what allows us to perceive it.

Now, instead of being hard, getting music to be precise, and to repeat sections exactly, is trivial. There's no challenge to inherently make sound repeat anymore. So it's easy to wind up with loop based music that is super boring, because it lacks the needed variation to keep it interesting. The more interesting producers of various flavors of EDM grapple with this challenge directly, and it is upon this boundary that we, the listener, can share in their expression!


> you just can't 'play an instrument' as part of that mix, the timing is way way too tight.

Live drumming has been part of "live performance" of electronic music for decades now. The drummers follow a click track. It doesn't seem to bother audiences.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: