What is conventionality/novelty in electronic music?

[vurt]

But that means that innovator are often strong expert in their field first.

Yes, absolutely. An engineer is a musician. He knows music, can play instruments or knows how to do it. He isn't a wizard, he is an amateur may be. But he can. And he defenitely understands musicians' needs.

i am.

[vurt]

tell us more about this strange pure data!

[whyterabbyt]

tell us more about this strange pure data!

its obviously not as novel as a 303 because there werent puredata genres.

[whyterabbyt]

To be honest, plenty of "ooh that's a new plug-in" stuff has been in these more esoteric libraries for a long time, since the 90s maybe. Like regarding physical modelling or granular synthesis.

90s? LOL.

[lobanov]

But that means that innovator are often strong expert in their field first.

Yes, absolutely. An engineer is a musician. He knows music, can play instruments or knows how to do it. He isn't a wizard, he is an amateur may be. But he can. And he defenitely understands musicians' needs.

i am.

Where have I written "you", vurt? He is not you, I agree.

[vurt]

he is the eggman

[Jac459]

1. soundmodel, who are you? What is the point of your interest regarding the novelty in music? Are you a musician? Or a "music engineer"? Or just a philospher, a theoretician?

2. I'm sure that the concept of novelty is wrong, misleading. What we are exploring is "novelty + usefulness". Novelty without usefullness is void. If somebody wants to be a successful innovator he/she must create something useful. It must be so cool, so musical etc. that many people start wanting to repeat, reproduce it.

That means that any successful innovation creates new ordinarity.

1. All, and I think electronic musicians should be "music engineers". I am bored with most sounds and tools, because their palette is mainly tailored for the conventional (acid basses, plucks, jupiter strings, dubstep drums, drum & bass drums, "IDM sounds", MIDI notes, ...). I have access to several of the more experimental types of tools, and I can program. To me a lot of people in this thread just don't seem to have a clue about where to look at, because e.g. Ryoji Ikeda and CNNs are certainly novel, but they're not necessarily appealing or accessible, because it's literally "code as music". Some people think that computer programs are not music or art. I wonder how many here know about Pure Data (https://puredata.info/) for example.

To be honest, plenty of "ooh that's a new plug-in" stuff has been in these more esoteric libraries for a long time, since the 90s maybe. Like regarding physical modelling or granular synthesis.

2. Exactly, and there have been several of those genre-opening people, who others begin to mimick while not being original anymore. You get a novel idea regarding beat cutting, then you get iZotope Stutter Edit.

What I thought of getting in answers was things like: what about a CNN doing X and Y? Haven't seen much of those ideas.

Why are you so upset man ?

I see you are making some downtempo music. Maybe you should try to listen to some ?

Some people in the forum are beginners...
Some people in the forum are pro sound designers.
Some people in the forum are brilliant melodist and don't need the freshness of a new sound in order to create something interesting, fresh and novel.
Some people in the forum are so talented that they don't need to innovate to create something interesting.
Some people in the forum prefer to explore new sounds for their own compositions because it is their way of differentiating themselves.
Some people in the forum do just shitty or simple music to relax after work...

Why does it upset you ?
Are you so insecure that you need everybody to think like you ?
Are you so insecure that you feel you need to look down at people doing something else ?

Your position remind me of other trending thread with a guy thinking that using presets is lame (like Michael Jackson did for example)... I am not sure if it is just a very dumb limited person or a genius troll...

[lobanov]

I am bored with most sounds and tools, because their palette is mainly tailored for the conventional (acid basses, plucks, jupiter strings, dubstep drums, drum & bass drums, "IDM sounds", MIDI notes, ...).

If you are bored with it try to create from it something which isn't boring. All the people make exactly this. Not you only. All the people. This is the main advice. And we all adhere to it every second.

[soundmodel]

No it does not upset me. What upsets me is that people destroyed this thread by starting argue about music. Instead of giving: what about a CNN doing X and Y, oh I know this guy who does that, oh listen to this track it's novel -type of answers.

[soundmodel]

I'll start with one example, but the thread is messed up by now:

Today I put an evolving chord to a sampler.
Then I put the same evolving chord as a duplicate.

I put an LFO to each, but so that the time signatures are different, yet they have some level at which they meet. They're not necessarily constant multiples, just find some times what work together. Choose an LFO shape that's "time neutral" and smooth, such as a sine wave. Have each of the two sounds above have their own filter (e.g. LP or HP). Make the each LFOs control the frequency of the respective filter. Set the filters to slightly different points.

The idea is to "mix" the two samples together using "pulsating filters". This creates very interesting "morphing" movement.

It sounded like something that I haven't heard very often at least.

[whyterabbyt]

what about a CNN doing X and Y

as opposed to NBC doing a Q & A, or Fox doing an FU, I presume.

[Jac459]

I'll start with one example, but the thread is messed up by now:

Today I put an evolving chord to a sampler.
Then I put the same evolving chord as a duplicate.

I put an LFO to each, but so that the time signatures are different, yet they have some level at which they meet. They're not necessarily constant multiples, just find some times what work together. Choose an LFO shape that's "time neutral" and smooth, such as a sine wave. Have each of the two sounds above have their own filter (e.g. LP or HP). Make the each LFOs control the frequency of the respective filter. Set the filters to slightly different points.

The idea is to "mix" the two samples together using "pulsating filters". This creates very interesting "morphing" movement.

It sounded like something that I haven't heard very often at least.

Like always man, it is not what you say but how you say it. If you said it in a more humble and polite way, people wouldn't have reacted like this (and by the way some people answered you with some artists example but you didn't respond to half of them and insulted the other half).

But anyway...

In fact what you are talking about here is not new genre or stuffs like that. It is more new producing techniques. Like the gated reverb invented by Phil Collins (if my memory is good) or some other stuffs from David Bowie, etc...

Then I have one for you I like to explore with:
Create a chord. Add a strong strum effect so the chord doesn't start all at the same time. Apply a very fast but slowing down LFO on each of the voices with a very strong impact on the cutoff of a lowpass filter (like 0 to 100% open). If you play with it well, it can create some exploding moving arpeggiating sounds. It sounds crap most of the time except when it sounds awesome... But you can spend hours tweaking it.

[Shabdahbriah]

... your creative solution is obvious.

whatyouneed.png

[soundmodel]

In fact what you are talking about here is not new genre or stuffs like that. It is more new producing techniques. Like the gated reverb invented by Phil Collins (if my memory is good) or some other stuffs from David Bowie, etc...

Well yes, because the reason why the H3000 was looked after was because it has some unique programs like some granular delays and harmonizers.

Those are, to begin with, close to impossible to replicate using conventional tools at that time. I think some people did granular delays by slicing audio and granulazing the slices.

It's also the reason why some people say Reaktor library is their secret weapon, because it has stuff that no other plug-in does.

[Jac459]

In fact what you are talking about here is not new genre or stuffs like that. It is more new producing techniques. Like the gated reverb invented by Phil Collins (if my memory is good) or some other stuffs from David Bowie, etc...

Well yes, because the reason why the H3000 was looked after was because it has some unique programs like some granular delays and harmonizers.

Those are, to begin with, close to impossible to replicate using conventional tools at that time. I think some people did granular delays by slicing audio and granulazing the slices.

It's also the reason why some people say Reaktor library is their secret weapon, because it has stuff that no other plug-in does.

Ok.
I know what you need...

I am pretty sure you are not in Bitwig...

If you were you would play all the day with the Grid... The Grid is the perfect playground to innovate (you can watch Polarity playing with it and you will understand quickly the potential), you can reproduce almost any kind of synth architecture by drag and drop of components....
It is a whole engineering environment to create your own synth.

In terms of funny way to use a software, I can refer you to another fun trick from Polarity. Taking a DC offset to create your own noise. As Bitwig modulator are polyphonic and audio rate, you can recreate a synth by using modulation. Here again, the level of control you get on your capacity to have weird Frequency Modulation of things that are not supposed to be frequency modulated is nuts.