Page 1 of 3
#1
ok so im not sure how to word this

but i often like it when the music i listen to is not perfect in technical terms. i like it if the instruments are ever so slightly out of tune, if the vocalist's voice is slightly rugged or imperfect in some other way ala bob dylan or when it comes to the drummer or percussionist i often find it pleasant to hear small imperfections in their beat. older or what some might call under-produced recordings are not a problem for me either, sometimes they actually add something to the music which i can appreciate.

of course this is all desirable in moderation, just having poorly tuned instruments will not make me like a piece of music. and i can't say this translates well to electronic music - i like some of it even though the beats are computer generated but then again the songs i have in mind also include samples of various sounds and instruments which i like a lot.

on the other hand, i've met people who go strictly against this. i can't really represent their position in this post because i've never properly talked about this before but that's why i made this thread

START HERE IF YOU CBA READING

so yeah, do you like small imperfections in your music or do you always prefer very polished, well-produced music? does it depend on the genre? does it depend on whether the imperfections are there for their own sake?


for clarification im not asking you if you LIKE REEL MUSIC WITH SOUL LIKE BLUES AND NONE OF THAT FAKE INSTRUMENT SHIT, just if when you hear certain songs that fit my earlier description are you bothered by the imperfections, do you enjoy them or do you just not give a fuck either way.


Gozd in gora poj,
silen ženimo hrup,
uboga gmajna, le vpup, le vkup,
le vkup, le vkup z menoj,
staro pravdo v mrak tulimo,
da se pretulimo skozi to zimo
Last edited by JamSessionFreak at Aug 6, 2016,
#2
example



Gozd in gora poj,
silen ženimo hrup,
uboga gmajna, le vpup, le vkup,
le vkup, le vkup z menoj,
staro pravdo v mrak tulimo,
da se pretulimo skozi to zimo
#6
I strongly dislike overproduced music in general. It's one of the reasons I enjoy amateur music so much. It's legit, honest stuff. Slick production values can hide the real skill (or lack thereof) involved.

That being said...I'm still a fan of 70's/80's Pink Floyd...probably the most overproduced band in history.
Last edited by TobusRex at Aug 6, 2016,
#7
another example



Gozd in gora poj,
silen ženimo hrup,
uboga gmajna, le vpup, le vkup,
le vkup, le vkup z menoj,
staro pravdo v mrak tulimo,
da se pretulimo skozi to zimo
#9
I've had a train of thinking floating around (in the empty space) for a while now that basically goes something like: mistakes and imperfections more accurately represent reality for me.

It came from my guitar teacher, who pointed out to me that a lot of delta blues players didn't follow or otherwise frequently came out of time. He argued that because you couldn't play in a band like that without it sounding incoherent and wasn't repeatable, that was a problem (I disagreed, and still strongly disagree). So I thought to jam nights, and what I noticed about making mistakes live is that everybody pays attention to them. If you hear someone hit a chord a semitone out, you all go "ooh", or at least have your train of thought interrupted - something in the brain seems to go "oi, snap out of it!". There's an element of chance and all the trappings contained within.

That's different to having the instrument out of tune, as you get used to that. But a little imperfection is a very human, very satisfying thing in art imo.
Quote by EndTheRapture51
who pays five hundred fucking dollars for a burger
Last edited by Banjocal at Aug 6, 2016,
#10
I'm of the mindset that as long as you make the best out of what you give yourself, your music is probably well executed and probably 'good'. The flipside is that if you're an accomplished musician, you better damn well show it otherwise why even bother? That's when 'music' becomes the sideline to whatever else it is you're trying to sell.

Examples:



This album is a self-produced effort that blends a lot of different elements together. The musicians behind it are all extremely good at what they do, both in terms of performance and writing. They've written and recorded a short and sharp prog metal jam after all, which is kind of hard to get right as a concept. It's not that technical or complex as a song but it certainly has great precision. There are no objective flaws in the production or recording aspects of this album/song.

However, it's got so much life in it considering how it's written. A memorable melodic idea given three or four variations, it then builds and grows to a massive climactic chorus ending. Nothing about it goes overboard, it's all 'as it should be'. This is a good song and I really like it.

Now lets consider this abominable piece of shit:



Probably took less than a day to write, no flair, no sense of expression outside of unintentional hilarity, no imagination, no flow, narrative or evolution. Recorded by top tosser Joey Sturgis in his fancy fuckin private studio where results are gained by pounding out the same one note riff for hours and hours until its rhythmically perfect (by not very good musicians).

Does this song start or sound like it's already part of a different song? Does it go anywhere outside of repeating the same 2 chunks of lyrical paragraphs and the same 3 or 4 riffs? Does it even try to give anyone a sense of energy?

This is an example of a band that was given a lot and did shit all with it.


Being a stickler for this, I absolutely do not like 'lo-fi' sounds, 'vintage' sounds, intentionally simplistic songs, stuff that claims to be 'the real thing' in whatever genre it is (looking at you, old school death metal), bands that are lazy with the recording process (like aforementioned tuning mistakes, sloppy playing etc) because it all breaks the immersion or becomes inauthentic. The human element does not necessarily matter to me.
o()o

Quote by JamSessionFreak
yes every night of my entire life i go to bed crying because i wasnt born american
Last edited by EpiExplorer at Aug 6, 2016,
#11
Agree with Banjo. John Lee Hooker, for example, rarely played with other folks. On his own he was amazing, mistakes and all...but because it was live with mistakes there was also potential to catch lightning in a bottle. Plus John Lee pretty much kept his own time, lol. Long as it sounded good he just didn't give a shit if it was perfect 4/4.
#12
I think you like the slight technical imperfection because it makes it sound honest. Same here then.
Live albums are the buss.
Last edited by Spinnerweb at Aug 6, 2016,
#13


Interesting science behind it (8hz Schumman etc etc, even if a lot of it is psued). I think 432 hz sounds better with piano, and chiller/relaxing/melancholic/etc music, and 440 sounds better for bright/energetic/powerful/etc music. Metal always sounds better at least a half-step down, whichever hz's those are

.
Last edited by Fat Lard at Aug 6, 2016,
#14
The reason it sounds better is because you're siphoning off the higher frequencies that give 440 it's full note. 432 alters that slightly, making the notes lower in pitch hence making them sound 'mellow' and less 'sharp'.

If it sounds better that's up to you though.

I do it Audacity all the time, seeing if it cleans up any bright sounding records.
o()o

Quote by JamSessionFreak
yes every night of my entire life i go to bed crying because i wasnt born american
Last edited by EpiExplorer at Aug 6, 2016,
#15
I like your comment about Dylan. to me that's what makes his music. it sounds like the simplest lines, but you can hear him throwing it off making it more complex while still keeping with the music. the guy was a genius despite what many people think of his stuff.
#16
Quote by EpiExplorer
The reason it sounds better is because you're siphoning off the higher frequencies that give 440 it's full note. 432 alters that slightly, making the notes lower in pitch hence making them sound 'mellow' and less 'sharp'.

If it sounds better that's up to you though.

I do it Audacity all the time, seeing if it cleans up any bright sounding records.


Yeah, but I think it 'feels' realer in whichever the musicians compose it, as that's the way that they're hearing it/temporally meaning/immersing themselves in the piece. Transposing Beethoven to 432 doesn't feel as good as keeping it at 440 (which he tuned up to because of the whole turning-deaf thing I hear)
.
#17
Quote by Fat Lard
Yeah, but I think it 'feels' realer in whichever the musicians compose it, as that's the way that they're hearing it/temporally meaning/immersing themselves in the piece. Transposing Beethoven to 432 doesn't feel as good as keeping it at 440 (which he tuned up to because of the whole turning-deaf thing I hear)


I guess I don't get that feeling then.

All of my casual research points to it being psuedo-science based on the whole 'well the greeks did it first' thing while the rest of that mumbo jumbo goes onto things like 'oh it's because it's all divisible by 3' or 'soundwaves affect living matter with good viiibes, maaaan'.

There was a very entertaining video a few years back of a man with a tuning fork and a glass of water doing a 'taste test'. He put the resonating fork in the water then instantly exclaimed 'already, I can tell that it's smoother, cleaner, more in tune with my body' etc etc, wishy washy dumb as fuck bullshit.
o()o

Quote by JamSessionFreak
yes every night of my entire life i go to bed crying because i wasnt born american
#18
Yeah, it's a bit psued. They say 432 is more heart-oriented and 440 more head-oriented, but if you're blasting it at any hz you can feel it through your body. I tended to prefer 440 once more than 432 in this instance (though the distortion tone made me lol):





Chopin recorded at 432 by a legit musician sounds better to me than when it's recorded at 440 though
.
Last edited by Fat Lard at Aug 6, 2016,
#19
Quote by Fat Lard
Yeah, it's a bit psued. They say 432 is more heart-oriented and 440 more head-oriented, but if you're blasting it at any hz you can feel it through your body. I tended to prefer 440 once more than 432 in this instance (though the distortion tone made me lol):





Chopin recorded at 432 by a legit musician sounds better to me than when it's recorded at 440 though

aaab

and the second wasn't the same it was played differently

either way if you're used to hearing a certain note at a certain frequency you're gonna prefer something which sounds in tune, intervalically it's aexactly the same provided everyone else tunes to the same frequency
#20
I like both. Music produced to express alienation and music produced to intimate humanity. I think you gotta try not to dislike a brand just cuz.
#21
Quote by mattedbird
I like your comment about Dylan. to me that's what makes his music. it sounds like the simplest lines, but you can hear him throwing it off making it more complex while still keeping with the music. the guy was a genius despite what many people think of his stuff.


I've heard people dying of lung cancer with more pleasant voices than Dylan. That guy couldn't sing his way out of a paper bag. His guitar skills...well, not much to write home about either. I've probably surpassed him already (on the axe) and I kinda suck, lol. But when it comes to writing tunes he was definitely one of the best of the 60's.

Neil Young, on the other hand....that guy COULD play And write. And sing (okay, not the best singer!).
#22
I hear too much of the clashing intervals that 432 produces too many times to listen to everything with it. That's the other reason 440 is used: The harmonics don't clash as much.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagorean_tuning

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolf_interval
o()o

Quote by JamSessionFreak
yes every night of my entire life i go to bed crying because i wasnt born american
#23
Hearing mistakes in music kind of reminds me that the person behind it is still human.

It seems weird, but I dunno, when I hear music I guess I forget that at some point a whole band of actual people performed and recorded it. I listen to a lot of Pink Floyd and David Gilmour though, and they were/are very particular about production so you don't get many little mistakes like that.
Quote by Trowzaa
I wish I was American.

~ A Rolling Potato Gathers No Moss ~
#24
Quote by kalypto
aaab

and the second wasn't the same it was played differently

either way if you're used to hearing a certain note at a certain frequency you're gonna prefer something which sounds in tune, intervalically it's aexactly the same provided everyone else tunes to the same frequency


Yeah, I was two 440s and one 432 of those. F Standard from the B string for the dopest sublime in that one part in Meshuggah's Straws Pulled At Random
.
Last edited by Fat Lard at Aug 6, 2016,
#25
I'll take both regardless of genre. Live performances that are overdubbed and pitch corrected to be perfect are both stupid and dumb unless the pitch correction is as an effect though.
Quote by H4T3BR33D3R
Youre officially uber shit now.

Quote by StewieSwan
3d9310rd is far more upset than i 

Quote by Bladez22
I'm a moron tho apparently and everyone should listen to you oh wise pretentious one
#26
Quote by eGraham
Hearing mistakes in music kind of reminds me that the person behind it is still human.

It seems weird, but I dunno, when I hear music I guess I forget that at some point a whole band of actual people performed and recorded it. I listen to a lot of Pink Floyd and David Gilmour though, and they were/are very particular about production so you don't get many little mistakes like that.



I'm a PF fan also...but the fact is that those guys were rarely in the same city, let alone together, when they recorded some of their best albums. I heard "Dark Side of the Moon" was all cobbled together from bits and pieces shipped to the studio by bandmembers. Don't know how much of it's true, but I seem to recall an interview where Gilmour essentially repeated what I said above (can't remember if it was Dark Side or not though).
#28
Overproduced stuff tends to be sound fake so I'm all for small imperfections. But only small ones. Clipping or bass thumps from crappy recording is just inexcusable. So is deliberately lo-fi stuff.
I have nothing important to say
#29
I just remembered that I fucking hate The Residents.
o()o

Quote by JamSessionFreak
yes every night of my entire life i go to bed crying because i wasnt born american
#30
I bet OP listens to Sonic Youth
"Social correctness has traditionally had nothing whatever to do with reason, logic, or physics. In fact, in England it is generally considered socially incorrect to know stuff or think about things."
-Douglas Adams
#31
I raise you guys: The Microphones

I'm also fond of acts like Wolf Eyes and noise bands in general when they deliberately use shit recording gear for the added noise. You can pull into it or punch through it. Or acts in general that are aping a particular "feeling", or making meta work

Though I'm not fond of lazy lofi/shit recording/shit technique, I've found the production on Newsom's Ys to be very frustrating at times. It's unbearably clean and the added effects almost feel unnatural when put into an all-acoustic ensemble.
Quote by EndTheRapture51
who pays five hundred fucking dollars for a burger
Last edited by Banjocal at Aug 6, 2016,
#32
Quote by TobusRex
I'm a PF fan also...but the fact is that those guys were rarely in the same city, let alone together, when they recorded some of their best albums. I heard "Dark Side of the Moon" was all cobbled together from bits and pieces shipped to the studio by bandmembers. Don't know how much of it's true, but I seem to recall an interview where Gilmour essentially repeated what I said above (can't remember if it was Dark Side or not though).

Yea you're right, they did a lot of sending clips around and organizing. What I meant though is that someone performed each instrument or vocal, not necessarily that they all performed at the same time.
Quote by Trowzaa
I wish I was American.

~ A Rolling Potato Gathers No Moss ~
#33
Quote by EpiExplorer
The flipside is that if you're an accomplished musician, you better damn well show it otherwise why even bother? That's when 'music' becomes the sideline to whatever else it is you're trying to sell.

I mean, why not?

I understand that the 'music' in your sentence is supposed to denote some pure aspect to the art itself but I'm honestly interested whether you're even able to argue the existence of music without the 'whatever else you're trying to sell'. I doubt you can say that what you look for is just 'music' while other people are also buying added luggage. What you're buying along with the music is technical prowess, intricate sound design, innovation, etc. Which is all fine and dandy, and I can understand why you'd look for that in art but what you're doing is assuming that your position is the default, the product without the ideology, the art without the bullshit.

It's akin to people shitting on modernist art because it's not even hard to do like say some impressionist piece or whatever. It's like saying that this painting



is just 'painting' in its true form while this painting



is carrying with it some extra baggage because the artist wasn't going for as much technical prowess as he could muster. While Hubert Robert definitely deserves a lot of admiration for the sheer mastery of technique that went into his work, you can't just say that this is the ultimate end goal of painting and that it is art in its pure form while the second work is carrying with it some extra baggage - fact is that both of them carry ideological weight, both of them try to achieve something which in itself is supposed to carry over to the person admiring the work.

Now I'm not saying this technical aspect to art is in itself meaningless because of some 'everything can be art' philosophy. It's just that with more or less all art you're never really appreciating some intrinsic value of the piece itself, you're always filling the role of the interpreter, you're always looking at the piece through an ideological lens.

Even more so, I think that the defining feature of music which sets it apart from other arts except for maybe film and theater, is that it can hit certain emotional notes in ways which are hard to explain or even notice. It can act as the perfect vessel for ideology because it brings out in us emotional and ideological reactions which cannot be interpreted easily. As the users above have stated, when they listen to imperfect mistake-filled music they feel feelings of authenticity, humanity, honesty although they have a hard time putting it into words - they are getting these feelings from sounds alone, from textures and note sequences which in itself don't even include words.

This is the beauty of music and I think that without realizing it, this is why even people completely disinterested in art enjoy music so much. Be it perfection, imperfection, emotional expression, joy, the tendency to dance, people look for something in music which is hard to explain with any one-dimensional dynamic.



Žižek explains it well, but what I find very interesting is the way this is used in movies where we are almost instructed via soundtrack to experience an emotional or ideological reaction. Or an even more unusual case which I came upon recently - this compilation of Hitler's speeches.

It's something I should be completely opposed to ideologically but through musical accompaniment and what I think is pretty clever choice of speech outtakes, it's able to make me feel something which usually happens in movies. It reminds me for instance of the Shire theme from one of the Lord of the Rings movies which always made me quite a bit emotional when watching them, even though the scenes themselves aren't really something that would have that effect on me on their own.



I think this is probably the greatest aspect of music I can find - the ability to act as a hidden vessel for ideology.


Gozd in gora poj,
silen ženimo hrup,
uboga gmajna, le vpup, le vkup,
le vkup, le vkup z menoj,
staro pravdo v mrak tulimo,
da se pretulimo skozi to zimo
Last edited by JamSessionFreak at Aug 6, 2016,
#34
look I find Zizek interesting and I agree that the idea that technical perfection is The Right Way and intentional "imperfection" is Wrong is hilarious at best and pretentious at worst but

are you unable to come if you don't reference Zizek at least once per day?
Quote by EndTheRapture51
who pays five hundred fucking dollars for a burger
#35
I think I legit can't actually.

I don't even consider him when I'm typing up shit or thinking about it but sooner or later there comes a point in my thought process where I'm just like 'fuck me I got this in a Žižek vid'. I usually notice it when I keep using one of his common phrases over and over again. This is part of why I want to start reading about Hegel and psychoanalysis - so that I can mask the fact that I'm just rewording what Žižek already said.



edit: Wait I didn't read your last sentence fully at first. Yes I can reach orgasm quite well on my own, thank you very much.


Gozd in gora poj,
silen ženimo hrup,
uboga gmajna, le vpup, le vkup,
le vkup, le vkup z menoj,
staro pravdo v mrak tulimo,
da se pretulimo skozi to zimo
Last edited by JamSessionFreak at Aug 6, 2016,
#36
psssh go read some nietzsche and some hume, scrub
Quote by EndTheRapture51
who pays five hundred fucking dollars for a burger
#37
I found a 432hz tuning app and felt a bit more creative than usual dabbling around in B Standard (E standard for the non-ERG plebs), but not sure how much of that is placebo. I could see metal doing some interesting things utilizing the dissonance from key changes in 432
.
#38
To be fair to jam, Zizek always has something interesting to say even if i don't agree with it


Also, this topic is better suited to our thread
Quote by ErikLensherr
Did you hear about the cockney Godfather?

He made them an offer they couldn't understand.
#39
Quote by eGraham
Yea you're right, they did a lot of sending clips around and organizing. What I meant though is that someone performed each instrument or vocal, not necessarily that they all performed at the same time.


Oh yeah, definitely.
#40
I've read excerpts from his stuff before and it was good reading but it didn't seem as interesting to me as the stuff I mentioned above.

Quote by mattedbird
I like your comment about Dylan. to me that's what makes his music. it sounds like the simplest lines, but you can hear him throwing it off making it more complex while still keeping with the music. the guy was a genius despite what many people think of his stuff.

Yeah I've thought about Dylan specifically and while I would appreciate if someone toned down his harmonica while they were mixing his shit, I don't think I'd like him as much if he was a more polished singer. The way he delivers his lines, which I already love from a lyrical standpoint, just works for me.

I've seen lots of covers of this song for example, most of them by technically better singers than Dylan but I didn't like any of them as much as I like the original.



Gozd in gora poj,
silen ženimo hrup,
uboga gmajna, le vpup, le vkup,
le vkup, le vkup z menoj,
staro pravdo v mrak tulimo,
da se pretulimo skozi to zimo
Page 1 of 3