KVR Audio

bibz1st · Post by **bibz1st** » Thu Apr 23, 2015 11:56 am

Sorry, I was only pointing it out, I wouldnt worry too much about it.
Im sure that most people have a "sketch" or even full blown compositions just waiting for the right moment/synth.
Perhaps the wording should be revised a little or even removed as people already know they cant do cover versions of "others" tunes.

spidergod · Post by **spidergod** » Thu Apr 23, 2015 4:52 pm

Sorry all, am going to have to listen to all entrys so far and add some comments.
Been mainly playing gta 5 online and mortal kombat x and also trying to justify buying omnisphere or outputs signal.

bjporter · Post by **bjporter** » Thu Apr 23, 2015 7:23 pm

wagtunes wrote:Well, then if that's the case, I can probably "technically" never enter another OSC again. After writing over 6,000 songs in my life, I can point to any song that I've written in the last 5 years and say "That part I probably ripped off from a song I wrote in 1989, and that part I ripped off from a song I wrote in 1979"

That's a fantastic skill you have

and it will come handy. A lot of us are still working on the compositions side. I struggle with song writing sometimes.

About the rule: Statistically, we've all been doing beats and melodies that others have done. If one decides to do an exact OSC version of Phil Collins - In the Air Tonight, or Madonna - I'm A Virgin, for example, that obviously is not cool. The rules haven't changed a whole lot since OSC#1, and while the rules can never be perfect, they work very well.

wagtunes · Post by **wagtunes** » Thu Apr 23, 2015 7:31 pm

bjporter wrote:
wagtunes wrote:Well, then if that's the case, I can probably "technically" never enter another OSC again. After writing over 6,000 songs in my life, I can point to any song that I've written in the last 5 years and say "That part I probably ripped off from a song I wrote in 1989, and that part I ripped off from a song I wrote in 1979"
That's a fantastic skill you have and it will come handy. A lot of us are still working on the compositions side. I struggle with song writing sometimes.

About the rule: Statistically, we've all been doing beats and melodies that others have done. If one decides to do an exact OSC version of Phil Collins - In the Air Tonight, or Madonna - I'm A Virgin, for example, that obviously is not cool. The rules haven't changed a whole lot since OSC#1, and while the rules can never be perfect, they work very well.

I'm cool just as long as I don't have to nit pick every riff, chord, beat or what have you that pops out of my head when I do these things. After a while, at least to me, all my stuff starts sounding the same. And trust me, after I've been doing these for 3 or 4 years, you're going to start to notice that as well.

psmacmur · Post by **psmacmur** » Thu Apr 23, 2015 9:01 pm

This is a fascinating and exasperating problem. A fundamental fact of human psychology is that familiarity breeds liking. Unfortunately for us struggling composers, it often means that when something finally sounds "right", it's not because it meets some absolute harmonic standard or whatever, it's just familiar... and thus a subconscious rip-off.

Chord progressions, specifically, have been proven non-copyrightable or something to that effect, so recreating a famous chord progression -- accidentally or not -- is a non-issue. In fact, could be a genre requirement.

Presumably, though, any composer who listens to enough music also risks unwittingly recreating at least part of a famous melody or bass line. I've definitely done it and also heard it in OSC. Personally, if I catch someone doing that, I might mark them down 1 point in voting, for lack of originality, and maybe call them out on it in a SoundCloud comment, if the mood strikes me.

I'm a jerk that way I guess.

I know from experience it's usually both unintentional and unavoidable, and since it's usually obvious from the rest of the track that it's not a cover, it never warrants a DQ. Some people deliberately pay musical homage to famous songs/passages/etc. in their tracks, too, and that's not a DQ, either; it's more of a remix culture thing, and if done well, can be brilliant.. a winning track by The Present comes to mind.

Overall with OSC rules, there are a few which are inherently grey areas: this here issue of originality is certainly one; FX usage, especially distortion, comes up a lot; someone even mentioned docking points for lazy track naming. In all these cases, a voter slap on the wrist seems more fair than a full DQ. This also leaves it up to each voter how much they personally care about a certain rule.

ontrackp · Post by **ontrackp** » Thu Apr 23, 2015 11:29 pm

Re: this very interesting discussion of what constitutes a cover song. I think a cover song refers to a song that was recorded, published, released on cd or on-line, and the new OSC version is a copy that requires no new composition.

Or, in other words, if you take an already existing song (someone else's or yours) and re-record it instead of composing something new, you've broken the rule.

While I have not written 6,000 songs, I've been composing for about 35 years and there is no question that I probably end up re-using certain favorite chord sequences and melodic or rhythmic motifs. However, these are the normal components of any song, and any songwriter with a recognizable style does the same thing. It's this repetition or re-use of similar elements that makes an individual's work recognizable.

In the OSC there has to be an honor system. If you have 1,000 midi sequences all stockpiled somewhere and pull some out to use in the OSC without regard to how the sound of that month's synth affects your composition, to me that's cheating. But who would know? Every OSC entry I make is 100% original for that OSC, but that doesn't mean I didn't use a similar chord structure in part of a song I wrote 10 years ago for another purpose. The two songs would probably sound nothing alike, but they could still share chords.

Sometimes we use chord changes that are similar to another song on purpose. On my entry for DEXED I used a chord change in the opening section that I felt was very representative of a disco style chord progression. I'm sure there are dozens of pop songs that had a similar chord structure. I hope nobody busts me for doing this -- it's just inspiration and a tribute to that style and hopefully works within a larger context.

The OSC is a fun competition, and it seems that there is suddenly lots and lots of attention to the finer points of the rules, which is a little puzzling to me as much of it should just be common sense. I would say as long as you don't copy the chords and melody of another song, you're fine.

Re: the original post, I agree that classical music is not exempt for the cover song rule and that interpreting a classical song should not be allowed unless you are making substantive changes to it thru your piece. OSC is a competition that includes composing as part of the challenge, so the expectation should be that you compose something new. It would be very interesting to have a competition that required interpretation of classical music using a synth though.

wagtunes · Post by **wagtunes** » Thu Apr 23, 2015 11:37 pm

ontrackp wrote:Re: this very interesting discussion of what constitutes a cover song. I think a cover song refers to a song that was recorded, published, released on cd or on-line, and the new OSC version is a copy that requires no new composition.

Or, in other words, if you take an already existing song (someone else's or yours) and re-record it instead of composing something new, you've broken the rule.

While I have not written 6,000 songs, I've been composing for about 35 years and there is no question that I probably end up re-using certain favorite chord sequences and melodic or rhythmic motifs. However, these are the normal components of any song, and any songwriter with a recognizable style does the same thing. It's this repetition or re-use of similar elements that makes an individual's work recognizable.

In the OSC there has to be an honor system. If you have 1,000 midi sequences all stockpiled somewhere and pull some out to use in the OSC without regard to how the sound of that month's synth affects your composition, to me that's cheating. But who would know? Every OSC entry I make is 100% original for that OSC, but that doesn't mean I didn't use a similar chord structure in part of a song I wrote 10 years ago for another purpose. The two songs would probably sound nothing alike, but they could still share chords.

Sometimes we use chord changes that are similar to another song on purpose. On my entry for DEXED I used a chord change in the opening section that I felt was very representative of a disco style chord progression. I'm sure there are dozens of pop songs that had a similar chord structure. I hope nobody busts me for doing this -- it's just inspiration and a tribute to that style and hopefully works within a larger context.

The OSC is a fun competition, and it seems that there is suddenly lots and lots of attention to the finer points of the rules, which is a little puzzling to me as much of it should just be common sense. I would say as long as you don't copy the chords and melody of another song, you're fine.

Re: the original post, I agree that classical music is not exempt for the cover song rule and that interpreting a classical song should not be allowed unless you are making substantive changes to it thru your piece. OSC is a competition that includes composing as part of the challenge, so the expectation should be that you compose something new. It would be very interesting to have a competition that required interpretation of classical music using a synth though.

So where do you draw the line? How much "borrowing" from other songs, styles, influences or whatever is "too much?" Who is to say? We can delude ourselves into believing everything that we write is completely original, even from our past works, if we want to.

But in my case, I can name any song I've written and sing the entire thing from beginning to end with no mistakes in interpretation. That happens when you're such a narcissist and listen to your own music constantly for 36 years. There is no way I can do a chord progression, beat, melody line or any other musical component and not instantly recognize it as something I did in another time. And if I wanted to, I could take 10 different sections from 10 different songs that share similar styles, elements, themes, riffs, or whatever, and turn those 10 different section into a "technically" brand new song.

But is it?

So again, where do we draw the line?

ontrackp · Post by **ontrackp** » Thu Apr 23, 2015 11:44 pm

@wagtunes -- I don't think anyone is trying to delude themselves that every note they play is original. I guess in your case you just have to crank up the synth 'o the month, listen to the nature of the sounds it makes and hope for new inspiration. Even if you pick up a chord progression you used on something else, you should be able to adapt in an original way for the new synth. There are about a million songs based on I - VIm - IV - V but they all manage to have an individual identity. And about a zillion songs use the a basic 4/4 "four on the floor" beat with the snare on 2 and 4 with 8th notes hi-hats. Same deal -- even though the beat is the same the harmony and melody can be different.

Skelpolu · Post by **Skelpolu** » Fri Apr 24, 2015 9:25 am

I've updated my entry just now - Made it less boom-y, a tad louder & removed one synth entirely.
Thanks for all the feedback so far, really looking forward to voting for the best tracks made with DEXED!

https://soundcloud.com/skelpolu/skelpol ... e-string-7

solidtrax · Post by **solidtrax** » Fri Apr 24, 2015 9:46 am

Oh boy.. It's the 24th of April already and we have not touched DEXED yet. We want to submit a track this month as we think DEXED is an awesome FM synth, but I'm afraid some deadlines will keep that from happening. Looking forward listening to all the submitted tracks! Bring it on boys (and girls?)!!!

Meakaale · Post by **Meakaale** » Fri Apr 24, 2015 3:55 pm

Anyone who get DEXED working properly with Fruily Loops?

The filter knobs keep resetting for me. Whats wrong?

mehum · Post by **mehum** » Fri Apr 24, 2015 3:56 pm

Meakaale wrote:Anyone who get DEXED working properly with Fruily Loops?

The filter knobs keep resetting for me. Whats wrong?

Same in Reaper, I used automation to get it to stick.

mehum · Post by **mehum** » Fri Apr 24, 2015 10:26 pm

Ok, new version after feedback!

https://soundcloud.com/neophile/mehum-n ... experience

Information below is still valid, nothing added, only tweaked!

mehum wrote:Near DX Experience

Probably my most ambitious tracks in 10 years. DEXED was really fun to work with! I always end up with pretty busy tracks but I hope I managed to control this both in arrangement and mix. However, since I've heard this track a thousand times I have hardly the distance needed to discern such things... Influence came this month from Jarre, Infected Mushroom, Pink Floyd (with a pretty obvious homage towards the end...) and last month's OSC.

I'm quite happy with how it turned out and hope that at least some of you enjoy it too!
Best enjoyed in headphones with eyes closed.

Don't hesitate to criticize. I do this to learn and perhaps teach, not for popularity or prizes.

DAW: Reaper 4.77
DEXED: 36 instances.
Mostly own presets.
Congas, cowbell, gong, one layer of crash cymbal and one layer of the pads comes from somewhere here:
http://bobbyblues.recup.ch/yamaha_dx7/dx7_patches.html

Other plugins used:
ReaEQ, ReaComp, ReaDelay, Klanghelm IVGI, A1StereoControl (automated pans), TAL Dub III, VOS epicVerb
JS Midi plugins: dwelx.zenvelope, midi_note_filter

Master:
ReaEQ, SlickHDR, TDR VOS SlickEQ, TDR Kotelnikov, Limiter No6

Meakaale · Post by **Meakaale** » Sat Apr 25, 2015 11:16 am

Wow mehum that's awesome!

mehum · Post by **mehum** » Sat Apr 25, 2015 11:56 am

Meakaale wrote:Wow mehum that's awesome!

Thanks!
Did you have any luck in using Dexed in FL?

One Synth Challenge #74: DEXED (Jasinski Wins!)