The Wagtunes Corner (Featuring My Best Yet)

[thecontrolcentre]

different kettle of fish obviously, easier for me to get away with it

Makes sense to play to your strengths ...

[vurt]

different kettle of fish obviously, easier for me to get away with it

Makes sense to play to your strengths ...

true, but imagine if i didn't actually prefer weird electronic stuff to listen to anyway, i may not be as comfortable with that as my output.

[thecontrolcentre]

different kettle of fish obviously, easier for me to get away with it

Makes sense to play to your strengths ...

true, but imagine if i didn't actually prefer weird electronic stuff to listen to anyway, i may not be as comfortable with that as my output.

For sure ... but if you played in a more conventional band, for instance, you'd likely practise more. I tended to get players who were better than me to join my bands. It made me try harder and improved my playing no end.

[vurt]

different kettle of fish obviously, easier for me to get away with it

Makes sense to play to your strengths ...

true, but imagine if i didn't actually prefer weird electronic stuff to listen to anyway, i may not be as comfortable with that as my output.

For sure ... but if you played in a more conventional band, for instance, you'd likely practise more. I tended to get players who were better than me to join my bands. It made me try harder and improved my playing no end.

sadly it's really not something aided by practice, it's more due to nerve damage.
but yes, many years ago i did a few bands, mainly rock/metal covers and a couple of death metal (orig) where i did indeed play to more conventional timing.

[JoeCat]

I practice playing drums with the metronome every day weeks before going into the studio, but we still do a lot of moving around. That's true for all the instrumentation. We ain't The Wrecking Crew, that's fo sho!

But it's not all-or-nothing - you don't have to quantize everything. Priority on the one, make sure kick and bass align on the important hits, etc. If we have multiple vocalists and one's a little behind the beat and the other ahead, we may adjust one or the other so they line up a bit better, but not necessarily move them both on the beat (you don't want to dehumanize vocals, but you don't want your singers sounding like drunk karaoke, either )

My one rule is that if I really hear it, it needs to be fixed. A drummer like Charlie Watts, for example, would play a bit behind the beat, but it was a consistent groove. His notes probably don't all line up on a piano roll, but that's not the same as, for example, rushing a fill into the downbeat, which sounds like ass (I know, 'cause that's my thang!). So Watt's kick might land right on the one but he'll hold the snare a bit to line up with Richards - in this way, the guitars and drums are a little "off", but in a good way. But he'll never kick the band in late.

With guitars for example - playing an arpeggiated guitar or a strum a bit "relaxed" may give a song a languid feel (if that's what you're after), but reaching a note or chord late (when it's not a consistent part of the groove, like swinging) will sound off.

Its all context, not on or off, and it's just a matter of practicing some critical listening - best done IMHO by putting a track away a few days and listening to it fresh (eyes closed; no peaking at the arrangement )

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

The next person who tells me I should stop quantizing, I'm just going to ignore.

You don't need to stop non-quantisation. You just need to practice playing in time with others (In this case, yourself).

One, I thought you were done with me. Isn't that what you said the last time you were here? I mean I don't mind if you still want to have an interaction with me but I wish you'd make up your mind.

Two, what do you think I've been doing for 42 years? I've been multi tracking all my songs playing in time to my own playing since 1977. Some people just have a lousy sense of timing. Unfortunately, I am one of them. This is not a question of not practicing. This is simply a matter of my being lousy at it.

Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in...

I think there's something else going on.

From the clip of you playing in your church, you clearly have no issue keeping time...and that's while singing at the same time. So, when you are leading it doesn't seem to be an issue.

I'm tempted to think it's your lacksidaisical 'don't-give-a-f**k' attitude, but something about the fact that you often cannot seem to hear when it's gone awry makes me think there is something else happening.

And I don't think this 42 years narrative is really serving you. It seems that for much of that time you've had a lot of criticism, but with very little of it being constructive, from people who couldn't help you improve. Aside from the song/lyric-writing (which is clearly your forte) you seem to have had the most growth in the last five years, on the forums. Reframed in that context you've probably made more progress than anyone else on here. So maybe stop telling yourself that "If I haven't managed it in the last 42 years, then...".

[wagtunes]

The next person who tells me I should stop quantizing, I'm just going to ignore.

You don't need to stop non-quantisation. You just need to practice playing in time with others (In this case, yourself).

One, I thought you were done with me. Isn't that what you said the last time you were here? I mean I don't mind if you still want to have an interaction with me but I wish you'd make up your mind.

Two, what do you think I've been doing for 42 years? I've been multi tracking all my songs playing in time to my own playing since 1977. Some people just have a lousy sense of timing. Unfortunately, I am one of them. This is not a question of not practicing. This is simply a matter of my being lousy at it.

Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in...

I think there's something else going on.

From the clip of you playing in your church, you clearly have no issue keeping time...and that's while singing at the same time. So, when you are leading it doesn't seem to be an issue.

I'm tempted to think it's your lacksidaisical 'don't-give-a-f**k' attitude, but something about the fact that you often cannot seem to hear when it's gone awry makes me think there is something else happening.

And I don't think this 42 years narrative is really serving you. It seems that for much of that time you've had a lot of criticism, but with very little of it being constructive, from people who couldn't help you improve. Aside from the song/lyric-writing (which is clearly your forte) you seem to have had the most growth in the last five years, on the forums. Reframed in that context you've probably made more progress than anyone else on here. So maybe stop telling yourself that "If I haven't managed it in the last 42 years, then...".

That much I will agree with. I have made more improvement in the last 2 years than in the 40 years prior. I finally had my big breakthrough when I took the time to truly study mixing. Even if my playing isn't great, my songs sound much better. There is no question there.

As to why when I play a song to multi track I can't get it sounding in time, I have no clue. I honestly don't. Maybe part of it has to do with the fact that the song in church we've been doing for years. I know it like I know my name. So I know where every beat goes. As you can see, I knew all the lyrics by heart too. I can't say that about a song that I just wrote.

Yeah, I know what you're going to say. "Then learn your own songs the way you learned somebody else's song and spend as much time learning it."

The problem with that is if I were to do that, I'd finish MAYBE 2 or 3 songs in a year.

I can't and won't accept that. Life is too short. Imagine spending 5 years to do ONE album. And at the end of it, given the law of diminishing returns, how much better is that album REALLY going to be? 10% better? Maybe 20% better? It's not like it's going to sound like a completely different person did it and be professional quality to the point where I could go to a label and they'd release it as is. For one thing, no matter how many years I spend on it, my voice isn't going to get better. In fact, it's going to get worse as I get older. Our lead soprano in our choir, who just turned 70, is dealing with that reality now. Her voice is starting to go and it's been very hard for her to accept. And this is a professional singer.

Ultimately, at the end of the day, this is a hobby. One I enjoy. And my enjoyment comes from writing continuously. NOT trying to perfect a performance. If I wanted to be a performer, I'd chuck the writing and go look for a group to gig with. That ISN'T what I want.

So I will just continue doing what I do and be happy doing it. Hey, in spite of my lousy playing, I still landed a job with a group as a writer. That's all I ever wanted in life as far as my music goes.

Mission accomplished.

[thecontrolcentre]

Mission accomplished.

That's what he said ...

[JoeCat]

Yeah, I know what you're going to say. "Then learn your own songs the way you learned somebody else's song and spend as much time learning it."

The problem with that is if I were to do that, I'd finish MAYBE 2 or 3 songs in a year.

I can't and won't accept that. Life is too short. Imagine spending 5 years to do ONE album. And at the end of it, given the law of diminishing returns, how much better is that album REALLY going to be? 10% better? Maybe 20% better?...

Could be a happy medium between 2-3 songs a year and 2-3 a day or so - a pace you've managed a few times!

Most bands that manage an album a year - if that - still often only have a few good songs per album. Even if you slow down a bit (song or two a week), you'd be taking a little more time. I get that it's not as much fun - it's like writing a novel stream-of-consciousness, then getting to editing it. That parts hard and really exposes your work to your own criticism, outside of the creative flow. It's tough, and probably why a lot of people don't finish most of their tracks at all.

You've got "finish what I start" accomplished, which is more than most - maybe just work on "take a little more time"

(I bet you could work on one small habit that would help: when you think a track is finished, put it aside for one evening, then listen to it the next day - you might hear things critically you didn't hear before, and likely with all your experience you'll be able to fix it easily).

[wagtunes]

Yeah, I know what you're going to say. "Then learn your own songs the way you learned somebody else's song and spend as much time learning it."

The problem with that is if I were to do that, I'd finish MAYBE 2 or 3 songs in a year.

I can't and won't accept that. Life is too short. Imagine spending 5 years to do ONE album. And at the end of it, given the law of diminishing returns, how much better is that album REALLY going to be? 10% better? Maybe 20% better?...

Could be a happy medium between 2-3 songs a year and 2-3 a day or so - a pace you've managed a few times!

Most bands that manage an album a year - if that - still often only have a few good songs per album. Even if you slow down a bit (song or two a week), you'd be taking a little more time. I get that it's not as much fun - it's like writing a novel stream-of-consciousness, then getting to editing it. That parts hard and really exposes your work to your own criticism, outside of the creative flow. It's tough, and probably why a lot of people don't finish most of their tracks at all.

You've got "finish what I start" accomplished, which is more than most - maybe just work on "take a little more time"

(I bet you could work on one small habit that would help: when you think a track is finished, put it aside for one evening, then listen to it the next day - you might hear things critically you didn't hear before, and likely with all your experience you'll be able to fix it easily).

See, actually, I've already tried this. My "Still Out Of Sync" CD, which I just recently finished, I started on March 26, 2019. I finished it on Aug 2, 2019. Over 4 months to do one album. At the end of it all, it wasn't really any better than CDs I knock off in a month. In fact, it wasn't nearly as good as the CD I did after, "The Cool Cat In The Wind" which took me exactly 1 month to do.

How much time I spend on something, because my skills are limited, doesn't really make all that much difference. I proved that with that CD. It was very disappointing.

So now, I concentrate on having fun and nothing else matters. Like I said, life is too short.

[vurt]

wasnt the out of sync one the one that got that band to sign you up?
maybe that extra polish worked more than you can realise?

[wagtunes]

wasnt the out of sync one the one that got that band to sign you up?
maybe that extra polish worked more than you can realise?

The song "Still Out Of Sync" got me noticed, but that was only because it was my most recent track. The song that they're going to put on our first album is one I did back on June of 2018. An album that took me 23 days to do 12 tracks. Not only that, but an album that was all Vocaloid. In fact, some of their favorite songs of mine are Vocaloid songs.

It was just chance that "Sync" got me noticed, that's all. Not that it was some great piece of work.

Please don't get me wrong. Most of my old stuff is horrible, but mostly because the mixes were so terrible. Honestly, I'm not sure what I gained from "Sync" by spending so much time on it. When I listen to it, I feel like it's just a bunch of wannabe Police knock offs that have very little life to them. Now that's probably more down to the songwriting than the productions or the playing. But regardless of what the problem was, obviously spending more time on a song doesn't by itself make it a better song.

I don't have any answers. All I know is I don't suddenly become Paul McCartney when I spend more time on a song. In fact, it seems the more time I spend on it, the more chance I have of ruining it.

[vurt]

fair enough, i just remembered it was around that time it started happening.

[wagtunes]

Correction. The song they're doing is from my CD "Pop Madness" which was also an all Vocaloid production. The album was completed in 25 days. I personally think it's a much better CD than "Sync". The songs are more inspired. The productions more interesting. I'll take it over "Sync" any day of the week. In fact, I'll take a lot of my CDs over "Sync".

For me anyway, time makes no difference and in fact may be a detriment to my creativity.

[wagtunes]

This is the song they want to do first. It is better than anything off of "Sync" by a mile, even with the Vocaloid singing.

https://soundcloud.com/steven-wagenheim ... op-madness