"free" groove comparison

[rachmiel]

if you have zee moment, please to compare these two "takes" of a free groove (which is meant to be the groove layer of piece that would also have bass, fx/pads, foreground, etc.):

http://rachmiel.org/xfer/beat_test-1.mp3
http://rachmiel.org/xfer/beat_test-1b.mp3

which speaks onto you more, and why?

thanks!

rachMiel

[bstageboss]

I think I'm a little more partial to the second one.

There is a hint of rhythm there that makes it more fun/interesting to have it taken away after a few seconds and creates a feeling of wanting it back, to the point where I internalize it, sort of tapping along in my head, and every once in a while there'll be a bit that lines up with what I'm (audio-)visualizing, making it a little reward for following along.

I guess what I'm saying is that the second one gets me involved more in it.

(Did any of that make sense?)

[rachmiel]

thanks for the listen and comment, bstageboss. it's very helpful. and, yes, it makes perfect sense that you found the second one more involving, for the reasons you give.

[rachmiel]

anyone else?

i'm not asking for a thumbs up or down on these, rather: which works better for you, and why. i'm trying to come to an understanding of "the rhythmic divide." :-)

[Morgaxx]

Hmmm. Number two has a more obvious pulse. For me this is due to the 'kik' on the first 'beat', which then seems to repeat as expected. Subconcious anticipation is important to listening. Who knows, perhaps one would work better in its proper context.

[stanlea]

Hmmm. Number two has a more obvious pulse. For me this is due to the 'kik' on the first 'beat', which then seems to repeat as expected. Subconcious anticipation is important to listening. Who knows, perhaps one would work better in its proper context.

I agree with this statement. You are going to add some more material, so maybe the pulse in the 2nd will be useless. I like books that asks me to build the meaning of the story by myself. The first could be better.

[ThoughtExperiment]

2nd one for me too, possibly because the delay/reverb puts it into a 'space' which makes it sound more natural - which seems like a daft thing to say about such unnatural sounds...
Also the repeats suggest more of a rhythm, making it less 'fractured' and therefore more 'groovy'
Hope this helps, Herr Professor

[rachmiel]

Hmmm. Number two has a more obvious pulse. For me this is due to the 'kik' on the first 'beat', which then seems to repeat as expected. Subconcious anticipation is important to listening.

yeah, i agree: very.

[rachmiel]

Hmmm. Number two has a more obvious pulse. For me this is due to the 'kik' on the first 'beat', which then seems to repeat as expected. Subconcious anticipation is important to listening. Who knows, perhaps one would work better in its proper context.

I agree with this statement. You are going to add some more material, so maybe the pulse in the 2nd will be useless. I like books that asks me to build the meaning of the story by myself. The first could be better.

so it's context that determines their relative "worth."

[rachmiel]

2nd one for me too, possibly because the delay/reverb puts it into a 'space' which makes it sound more natural - which seems like a daft thing to say about such unnatural sounds...
Also the repeats suggest more of a rhythm, making it less 'fractured' and therefore more 'groovy'
Hope this helps, Herr Professor :)

i would think that most listeners would call #2 more of a "groove," because it lies closer to the grid than #1. yes, it helps. :-)

[seismic1]

so it's context that determines their relative "worth."

You're probably right. I made the mistake of reading the thread before listening to 1) followed by 2) and I preferred 2).

However, when I replayed 1), I think I preferred that! Then I replayed 2 and changed my mind again.

So, context and familiarity are hooks, which interestingly enough was something that I found in the melodies of Frank Zappa, which were not always immediately arresting, but eventually took me hostage, and I'm still a captive

[polyslax]

Yup, number 2 definitely feels easier to swallow, opening on the down beat and keeping the kick more or less in the pocket, a couple of tempo synced delays that carry the listener over dangerously blank territory... it's interesting how we can suddenly feel lost.

I also feel I need context to say whether one works better than the other. You could build around either of course, but I think in general one attracts more ears as one approaches the grid.

[jopy]

personally, i found number 2 more appealing because it manages to give that semblance of a tight rhythm while still flirting with chaos--walking that fine line is always intriguing to me. the first one was more overtly "pulse-less" so it seemed a bit like playing tennis without a net; it didn't sound as challenging to the composer even if it would possibly be more challenging for the listener.

[ntom]

I feel used Using my comment for your social experiment.

[rachmiel]

Yup, number 2 definitely feels easier to swallow, opening on the down beat and keeping the kick more or less in the pocket, a couple of tempo synced delays that carry the listener over dangerously blank territory... it's interesting how we can suddenly feel lost.

lost is the exact point at which i start getting *really* interested.

I also feel I need context to say whether one works better than the other. You could build around either of course, but I think in general one attracts more ears as one approaches the grid.

fer sure. sigh ... ;-)