KimyReizeger

Sickeningly fashionable, I'd imagine. www.myspace.com/hadoukenuk Do people like this stuff?

Though it should probably be remembered that a charity event of this sort shouldn't really be analysed for its artistic value, rather the more fascinating ease by which 80,000 people can be persuaded into "standing around for five hours" and remaining "well up for it".

Had to leave the room when the eternally child-like and vaguely boisterous Fearne Cotton started dishing up her nauseatingly uncommon over-appreciation of unremarkable things. Wild praise to a pair of washed up fools from Duran Duran and all too transparent simperings regarding the passing of this sensational woman.. "That was amazing guys, were you loving it?" etc etc.

It's great. Good groove, a dark edge, cracking drum sound.

Looks pretty cool, cheers.

Nothing really there. It could quite easily be a medley of Guns N' Roses, Queens Of The Stoneage, Muse, Alice In Chains, Black Flag.. songs.

I actually got The Book of Dave last week, but can't really get into it at the moment. It definately seems like a pretty ambitious idea though.

Can anyone recommend me something along the lines of Martin Amis, Hunter S. Thompson, JD Salinger, Easton Ellis? I lost a friends book on the bus. I want to get him something good as an apology, something mind-blowing preferably, though maybe just a ruddy good read.

You want to charge 150 quid a day for the sake of your own personal experimentation and port-folio building?

There's just nothing like an isolated example to act as a generalisation for an entire argument!! In reality, there's no debate as, clearly, we have different music tastes. Recently I've rarely been able to find anything I want in Aberdeen, let alone for under a tenner. Talking of second-hand sections - Amazon..

The responses in this thread remind me of a scene in The Office where David Brent is asked what changes he has been making to cut costs and he reels off a list of transparent managerial remarks such as 'improved efficiency, increased profits' (or something similar). I assume anyone that says a good drummer is someone who can 'keep time' has been hugely unsuccessful in their drummer recruitment process and has potentially had to suffer many afternoons with musically inept stick-wielding incompetents? As with any other instrument, I like a drummer with enough talent to exert their own character through their playing and remain responsive to what else is happening.

So your music taste is determined by the ebb and flow of a sales rack?

What's so special about Fopp? A certain pleasure to be held in being ripped off?

A fascination with something like guitars surely transgresses anything to do music and becomes mere aesthetics - guitars all fundamentally perform the same function. Similarly, I can only imagine surrounding yourself with a thousand synths, effects, samplers, drum machines and Kaoss Pads invokes a limitation of another sort. Fags, bad nights out, ugly girls and sporadic psychotic episodes invariably produce the inspiration for my music, not a piece of hardware. As said earlier, the instrument is just a tool to provide a particular representation of what's in yer 'ead, so if there's nothing knocking about upstairs in the first place..

What is your main softsynth?

Just put up a tune I knocked up last night after being on 'ere. It's called Grenache.

I think we are at cross-contexts: If you want to judge it against other very bad local music then, yes, I suppose its fab.

KVR: slim slow slider Side Chain Compressor - Virtual Effect

That's pretty interesting. I mean, I was never suggesting expensive equipment has the exclusive bearing on sound quality, but it's difficult to get information or experience on this kind of thing in Aberdeen, where I'm pretty sure they simply don't sell synths as a rule. Is that not absurdly cheap for a Moog?

Ok, I apologise for the over-explanation of myself. in future I'll just tell you it's gash and knock myself up some peanut butter sandwiches instead.

Pretty understandable really. Thanks for setting a standard, one which is hard to get among the muso back-scratching and cyber high-fiving of myspace. In my defence - I'm relatively inexperienced, generally improving and subsequently find identifying where your comments lie not particularly difficult (kind of like a lazy restaurant manager who knew he would get found out sooner or later, but was happy to keep skiving off anyway). I must've been listening to BoC at the time I made a couple of those and am happy to know that nothing I've made recently imitates them so blatantly!

By that I just meant I've been sporadically picking through it, but not really getting anywhere. And, - as stated - because I like some of his other stuff; it's a 'classic'; playing it off against 1984 is a worthy discussion point. Huxley stated that he thought his was a better read.

Good point. If it was DMin, if I remember correctly, you never really use the 7th chord (Cmaj) anyway, and I'm positive a II-III-V in Fmaj is no good also. If it sounds bad, there's probably a rule in place to stop it happening, so I'm fairly confident.

Loved it. My favourite bit being the comprehensive justification of zoos!

Yeah I know, of course they don't. On the contrary, pop and rock continually break many of the rules. Fact is, tonally speaking, the rules have shaped your hearing even if you don't know it. The music made for hundreds of years before you has impregnated mankind of the future with an ear for a certain sound, naturally corresponding to your geographical positioning. In our culture, a I-II or a I-II-IV sounds bad and subsequently amatuerish, in others it may be different; Indian classical music certainly worked on a different tonal basis to Western. Your tune, unlike a power chord riff or something covered in a thousand effects, involves a piano, and a generally 'clean' mix, emphasizing the tonality (i.e, minor or major), so the rules unfortunately do apply (because of the aforementioned tonal burden inherited from by-gone ages (i.e the Western classical tradition of which you cannot escape whether you like it or not). Beethoven and Simon Cowell would both say it sounds bad. I'm sorry if that makes no sense, it's really late, I just kind of spewed it out. And anyway, since when have pop producers been the best judges of music? EDIT: I forgot to say, my introduction of 'the rules' was merely a chance to utilise the combined views of the greatest composers past and present as a vehicle to strengthen my own point. As stated in another topic, music is subjective, there are no absolutes. In this case however, there is an overwhelming, eternity of master-composers who would agree with me over you, which is about as close as you can get to a 'right answer' in a democratic field. I can't see the I-II-IV becoming popular in the near future either; feel free to try though, whatever floats your boat.