JSngry Posted August 5, 2008 Report Share Posted August 5, 2008 http://sp-forums.com/viewtopic.php?t=1575&...e3cc055c326aa4a Shit, my kids know all about this stuff, but it's kinda new to me (so yeah, I'm even further behind the technology curve than I already thought I was...). Cats take a sampling machine and break down a classic "pop" record into it's component parts. No doubt intended for sampling purposes, but if you really want to get inside a record and see exactly what's happening, w/o having to listen through the mix and such, this is freakin' great! The Marvin Gaye vocal tracks alone are worth the effort... Not sure if this counts as a violation of the O-Board Blog Rule or not, I can kinda see it going either way, but I think this is more educational than recreational. However, if the moderators disagree, I understand. But check out Marvin on "Ain't No Mountain..." DAMN! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tkeith Posted August 5, 2008 Report Share Posted August 5, 2008 Wouldn't you know it -- that link is broken. But I checked out the Marley -- very cool. Wish I knew how to operate such technology -- it'd make transcription much easier! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSngry Posted August 5, 2008 Author Report Share Posted August 5, 2008 Wouldn't you know it -- that link is broken. Try this one. What bugs me most about playing in cover bands is how a lot of the parts get schlepped through, like they don't matter, and like "close enough" is good enough. Well, sometimes it is. But sometimes the originals are constructed with a great deal of specificity, and it's that specificity, not that it's such a great song, that sometimes goes a long way towards making for a great record. Now, not too many cats want to take the time to learn this shit exactly just to play weddings and shit, & I sure understand that, believe me, but just as a matter of musicianship and personal pride, I do think that if you're going to make the money, then you should respect the music, or at least respect the part(s) of it that call for respect, which in some cases is the individual parts of a classic production where the arrangement/production is at least as integral to the overall mojo of the record as the song and/or the singing. I mean, on a great Motown side like "Ain't No Mountain...", it ain't exactly a garage band jamming their way through the changes, if you know what I mean. You got cats playing parts, and playing tem quite specifically, and quite well. And you also got Marvin & Tammi. Not a problem with any of that. The only thing worse than playing a cliched but nevertheless greaat song for the 500,001 time is to play it badly and or wrong. Why not just wear a sign that says "Not only am I a whore, I'm a lousy whore"? For those of us who take at least some pop music seriously in terms of arrangement and production, of conscious choices being made to effect a highly specific intended end, a resource like this like this is akin to studying the score for a classical piece along w/the record, which as anybody who's effectively done that will tell you can, and often does, open up your ears to the specifics of a piece just about as quick as anything. Sure, not everybody needs this level of detail, especially people who listen for entirely or mostly for the satisfaction of pure emotional engagement. But for those of us who enjoy, and actually have a need to experience, the taking apart of something to see how it's put together, well hey. this sure as hell beats trying to decipher a final mix that's often been glazed over with all the reverb and eq and such. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DukeCity Posted August 5, 2008 Report Share Posted August 5, 2008 I can't even wrap my brain around the idea of software that could take apart a record like that. I was assuming that someone had found original multi-track master tapes and just posted them one track at a time. But you know what happens when you assume... You make an ass out of Uma Thurman.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7/4 Posted August 5, 2008 Report Share Posted August 5, 2008 But you know what happens when you assume... You make an ass out of Uma Thurman.... . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Alfredson Posted August 5, 2008 Report Share Posted August 5, 2008 I can't even wrap my brain around the idea of software that could take apart a record like that. I was assuming that someone had found original multi-track master tapes and just posted them one track at a time. As far as I know, these are from the original multitrack tapes. There is a lot of stuff out there in this category, including stuff by Queen, The Jackson Five, Beatles, etc. That said, there is new software coming as an update to Melodyne that will allow you to manipulate the individual parts of a single wave form. In other words, you could put in a stereo mix of a tune and actually change the notes in the guitar part. It's pretty amazing. However, it's not fool-proof and having the multitracks would still be far easier and reliable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSngry Posted August 5, 2008 Author Report Share Posted August 5, 2008 I can't even wrap my brain around the idea of software that could take apart a record like that. I was assuming that someone had found original multi-track master tapes and just posted them one track at a time. As far as I know, these are from the original multitrack tapes. There is a lot of stuff out there in this category, including stuff by Queen, The Jackson Five, Beatles, etc. So these tracks are actually lifted out of the studio archives then? Wasn't Motown still doing 3-track in 1967? (for that matter, wasn't Abbey Road the only Beatles album done on more than 3 track?) The file I downloaded has everything separate, 2 separate key tracks, 1 track with 2 or 3 guitars, separate string track (interesting, that one is...), Jamerson all by himself, and, of course, the stars of the show, each on their own track. Would such individual tracks have existed from a 1967 Motown session, or would they have to be "retro-engineered" into creation? And if so, doesn't the technology already exist in home software to do that? I'm not claiming you're wrong, mind you, I was just under the impression that "take apart" software was already out there in the sampling world, stuff that allowed you to focus in on one part and pull it out. Don't know anything about this stuff, just that I've "heard about it" here and there, and that both my kids seem to think that it's old news already. But if I gotta choose between believing them or you on something like this, I'm going with you, the man in the trenches. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.:.impossible Posted August 5, 2008 Report Share Posted August 5, 2008 This is how Danger Mouse created the Grey Album, but he didn't have the mulit-tracks to all of the Beatles material. He had to separate everything himself. For fun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.:.impossible Posted August 5, 2008 Report Share Posted August 5, 2008 here's a link if you didn't already know about the project. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grey_Album I also remember a friend playing me mashups of popular top 40 stuff back in 2002 that was really impressive. Of course, at the time, I had just discovered Anthony Braxton and Max Roach duets, so I didn't give it much attention. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Garrett Posted August 5, 2008 Report Share Posted August 5, 2008 For what it's worth, in various places online I've run across the multitracks to ANMHE, no one's ever claimed that they were anything except the original multitracks. Of course, it's possible they could've been reverse-engineered, but someone in this thread on another forum claims the tracks were licensed by Digidesign for the express purpose of demo-ing Pro Tools functionality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Alfredson Posted August 5, 2008 Report Share Posted August 5, 2008 I believe Motown was one of the first studios to have an 8-track machine, which was custom built for them. They had it as early as 1964. According to this article with chief Motown engineer Bob Ohlsson, the first song recorded on it was "Where Did Our Love Go", which was released in 1964. The Beatles were still working with three to four tracks up until the late 60s, but American tape technology was quite a bit ahead of our British counterparts for some time. The first commercially available 8-track was from Ampeg. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSngry Posted August 6, 2008 Author Report Share Posted August 6, 2008 This is how Danger Mouse created the Grey Album, but he didn't have the mulit-tracks to all of the Beatles material. He had to separate everything himself. For fun. For what it's worth, in various places online I've run across the multitracks to ANMHE, no one's ever claimed that they were anything except the original multitracks. Of course, it's possible they could've been reverse-engineered, but someone in this thread on another forum claims the tracks were licensed by Digidesign for the express purpose of demo-ing Pro Tools functionality. I believe Motown was one of the first studios to have an 8-track machine, which was custom built for them. They had it as early as 1964. According to this article with chief Motown engineer Bob Ohlsson, the first song recorded on it was "Where Did Our Love Go", which was released in 1964. The Beatles were still working with three to four tracks up until the late 60s, but American tape technology was quite a bit ahead of our British counterparts for some time. The first commercially available 8-track was from Ampeg. Ok, so it seems that the reality is that these tracks are the originals, but also that reverse-engineering is possible with current software. So, it's Certs! Interesting times, indeed! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJ Shearn Posted August 6, 2008 Report Share Posted August 6, 2008 I'm listening to the "What's Going On?" tracks, right now Marvin's lead vocal. Also d/l' "Superstition". Is there a way to use a program to do this with CD's? it sounds like the second lead vocal for Marvin is the one mostly used on the master take of "What's Going On"? this stuff is great Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Alfredson Posted August 6, 2008 Report Share Posted August 6, 2008 It's possible to an extent with current software (and even hardware), but not to the extent of the Marvin Gaye tracks. It depends of course on the source. A lot of Beatles stuff was released in that weird "split" stereo sound where different sounds are hard panned to one side or the other. For instance, drums on one side, vocals on the other, and guitars in the middle. It would be a lot easier to take that "apart" than a full mix. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJ Shearn Posted August 6, 2008 Report Share Posted August 6, 2008 damn, cuz theres a lot of details in PMG tracks I'd love to uncover............ or, in the case of CTI Summer Jazz at the Hollywood Bowl, hearing what Jack DeJohnette and Ron Carter really played live as opposed to the Steve Gadd/Gary King overdubs in the album mix, cuz I would really hear Jack's broken funk over "Rock Steady" and "Inner City Blues". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSngry Posted August 6, 2008 Author Report Share Posted August 6, 2008 It's possible to an extent with current software (and even hardware), but not to the extent of the Marvin Gaye tracks. It depends of course on the source. A lot of Beatles stuff was released in that weird "split" stereo sound where different sounds are hard panned to one side or the other. For instance, drums on one side, vocals on the other, and guitars in the middle. It would be a lot easier to take that "apart" than a full mix. Gotcha. Thanks for that clarification. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.:.impossible Posted August 6, 2008 Report Share Posted August 6, 2008 Especially now. I don't know how easy it was four or five years ago, but audio software is moving so quickly, I'd almost consider many of the programs that I've seen at work on the level that Photoshop has become for graphics. Your imagination is the limit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted O'Reilly Posted August 6, 2008 Report Share Posted August 6, 2008 (edited) The first commercially available 8-track was from Ampeg. Not "Ampeg" the bass amplifier people, but Ampex. From the late 1940s, the leading tape recorder company. A very early investor was Bing Crosby, who used tape on his radio shows, so he wouldn't have to do live both an east-coast, then a west-coast version of his show... Good info at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ampex Edited August 6, 2008 by Ted O'Reilly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Alfredson Posted August 7, 2008 Report Share Posted August 7, 2008 Yes of course, Ampex is what I meant. That's what I get for posting after being at the studio all day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.