Wiardgroup

Yeah, I have to agree, *that* was one (of many) inarguable and uniformed comments. Too bad the opinonator doesn't use Buchla or Wiard modules to really get to know them.

Paul of MOTM's microbrewery analogy is a good one. 

And although on the surface we can talk about East vs West coasts, it's a different world than it was in the '60s, especially with the Internet and online file sharing. In other words, the lines are blurry.
g

> ----------
> From: 	Chris Whitten
> Reply To: 	wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: 	Thursday, June 24, 2004 3:21 PM
> To: 	wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: 	Re: [wiardgroup] Re: Please support Original Design
> 
> > But they weren't as common
> > as Moogs because they were limited to one kind of music and simply
> > would never sell like a Moog. New? Yes. Unique? Yes. Useful? Only
> > within the confines of atonal experimentalism.
> 
> Those are some of the strangest comments.
> Buchla limited to one kind of music?
> Buchla only useful within the confines of atonal experimentalism?
> I'm using mine everyday for tv soundtrack work.
> As you probably realise, tv music scores vary wildly from project to
> project.
> CW
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>

Gino wrote:

>Yeah, I have to agree, *that* was one (of many) inarguable and 
uniformed comments. Too bad the opinonator doesn't use Buchla or 
Wiard modules to really get to know them.<

"Uniformed?"  What am I, Janet Jackson?  :-)

Certainly you didn't mean "uninformed."  Just because I've never been 
to Egypt doesn't mean I can't tell you all about the pyramids. Hell, 
do you know how many manuals I wrote for Ampex without ever seeing 
the equipment?  [Wiard Group: "Well, THAT explains why that crap 
never worked!"  :-) ]

I stand by my words. The Buchla, as you well know, was created for 
avant garde and atonal music. I would challenge you to name five 
traditional recordings using Buchla. I can think of only one, "A Very 
Merry Electric Christmas To You," and that uses the Buchla only 
briefly and with a sequencer. It just isn't designed for that.

While from all indications the Wiard can be used for traditional 
music, there seems to be virtual vacuum in that realm. Modules like 
the Wogglebug are hardly applicable to such venues, wouldn't you 
agree? Now that I think of it, how often do you see the Wiard 
pictured with a keyboard?

Mind you, this isn't knocking the Wiard. I'm just saying that it 
seems to follow in Buchla's shoes, and might balance that out with 
more traditional modules so as to enjoy a broader audience.

Grant and Paul: Those were both interesting posts!  Pity they didn't 
appear in TGS.  :-)

Hmmmmm.... just noticed the rather odd title of this post.

johnm

Johnm,
As I said, I'm using Buchla modules constantly for mainstream melodic parts
in television music scores. I've found the Buchla Oscillators have
tremendous low end for dance music and/or Drum n Bass type stuff.
I don't understand your blanket statement. If you have oscillators,
envelopes, filters and a keyboard (even if it's kinesthetic), why can't you
make melodic or 'traditional' types sounds, as opposed to avante garde or
'atonal' as you put it?
The beauty is, with Buchla you've got all the esoteric capabilities too.
I don't disagree with your general argument. I just think some of the
examples you're putting forward to support it are WAY off base.
Does a television score count as a 'traditional recording' in your book?
If so I've done 3 so far this year that were heavy on Buchla generated
melodic material.

Chris Whitten wrote:

> Johnm,
> As I said, I'm using Buchla modules constantly for mainstream melodic parts
> in television music scores.


I'd love to hear some sample of what you're doing. Got anything posted 
anywhere featuring the Buchla?


-- 
Les Mizzell
--------------------------------------------------
Certe, toto, sentio nos in kansate non iam adesse
--------------------------------------------------

Chris wrote:

>As I said, I'm using Buchla modules constantly for mainstream 
melodic parts in television music scores. I've found the Buchla 
Oscillators have tremendous low end for dance music and/or Drum n 
Bass type stuff.<

But the musical genres you name (dance, D/B) are essentially 
sequencer based. Even a PAIA 2700 oscillator can be used accurately 
with a sequencer, as each note is individually set. Are you using 
your Buchla to play melodies with a keyboard? Are you multitracking 
such melodies?

Please don't take this the wrong way, but why are you using an analog 
for that kind of work? I don't see how that can be efficient.


>I don't understand your blanket statement. If you have oscillators, 
envelopes, filters and a keyboard (even if it's kinesthetic), why 
can't you make melodic or 'traditional' types sounds, as opposed to 
avante garde or 'atonal' as you put it?<

It has to do with the stability and linearity of the oscillators, 
etc.  I've never heard any Buchla owner speak highly of the filters.

BTW, I'd be very interested to hear your music!  Could you please 
post a sample?

johnm

> I'd love to hear some sample of what you're doing. Got anything posted
> anywhere featuring the Buchla?
Sorry no (haven't got a website yet).
My latest tv project will no doubt appear on a screen near you. It's a BBC
production which I'm sure will be sold to The States. I'll let you
know.................but (as per my previous answer) you might find the
Buchla element to be boringly traditional. LOL

> Mind you, this isn't knocking the Wiard. I'm just saying that it 
> seems to follow in Buchla's shoes, and might balance that out 
with 
> more traditional modules so as to enjoy a broader audience.

I think its fairly clear at this point that the wiard modules in 
production are intended to be creative expansions for other 
frac-rack type systems (blacet, paia, etc). If a person wanted 
more "traditional" modules for example they'd probably find it 
easiest to get a blacet vco/filter/vca/etc and stick them in the 
same rack. The 300 series is, I think, a historical peice being 
rare and unavailable and if collectors want to drive up the value 
for that reason then that particular synth will be shifted from a 
users market to a collectors market. There will be plenty of other 
options more reasonably priced tools to suit many different 
tastes I'm sure. I myself am fascinated by the idea of the JAG 
and will probably get one soon.

--- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, "konkuro" <konkuro@a...> wrote:
> Chris wrote:
> 
> >As I said, I'm using Buchla modules constantly for mainstream 
> melodic parts in television music scores. I've found the Buchla 
> Oscillators have tremendous low end for dance music and/or Drum n 
> Bass type stuff.<
> 
> But the musical genres you name (dance, D/B) are essentially 
> sequencer based. Even a PAIA 2700 oscillator can be used accurately 
> with a sequencer, as each note is individually set. Are you using 
> your Buchla to play melodies with a keyboard? Are you multitracking 
> such melodies?
> 
> Please don't take this the wrong way, but why are you using an analog 
> for that kind of work? I don't see how that can be efficient.

maybe because it sounds good? Or he finds it inspirational to work
that way?

> 
> 
> >I don't understand your blanket statement. If you have oscillators, 
> envelopes, filters and a keyboard (even if it's kinesthetic), why 
> can't you make melodic or 'traditional' types sounds, as opposed to 
> avante garde or 'atonal' as you put it?<
> 
> It has to do with the stability and linearity of the oscillators, 
> etc.  I've never heard any Buchla owner speak highly of the filters.

wait a second...

A Buchla 259 has a volt/octave CV input. The 221, 218 and 219
keyboards all have equal tempered CV outs. I don't see what makes that
system in any way melodically inferior to a Moog modular or ARP 2600
or whatever. If you are referring to the 258 oscillators, I can see
that they are hard to get to track together, because they only have
variable scale CV inputs, but it is possible. The problem of them  not
tracking linearly or being unstable is a myth. The ONLY issue with any
Buchla 200 oscillator preventing anyone from making equal tempered
pitches is that the 258 has no volt/octave calibrated input. I assume
the addition of a fine tune control on the left most CV input of the
258c must have been reaction to users' desire to get the oscillators
to track.

Incidentally, the Buchla Music Box was not intended to focus on
filtering as the major means of tone shaping. Using a 259 as an
example, harmonic content and tonal character can be controlled from
voltage, so there is no need for filtering of the signal later. The
258 oscillators allow voltage controlled sweeps from sine to saw or
square wave, much like a lopass filter sweep with no resonance.

Suggesting that  VCO-VCF-VCA synthesis is required, with a "good
filter", to make "traditional" music is hogwash. The sweeping
resonance sound, made popular by the Moog Ladder, is not a sound
derived from classical music or orchestral instrumentation. Maybe Don
doesn't like the "yeaow" sound of a sweeping resonant lopass filter, I
don't really care for it myself. If nobody ever talked about good
sounding Buchla filters, then why is every synth company jumping on
board with a lopass gate clone of some kind? BTW, the 291 bandpass
sounds great.

Anyhow, Wiards, Serges, Buchlas all have the ability to track a
keyboard. So there is nothing preventing them from playing melodic
music, except the user.

mark

> Are you using 
> your Buchla to play melodies with a keyboard?
Yes, the touchplate style keyboard.
>Are you multitracking
> such melodies?
Sometimes. Why not?
> Please don't take this the wrong way, but why are you using an analog
> for that kind of work? I don't see how that can be efficient.
Me no understand? Why can't I use anything I want? I'm the composer and
performer. It's not about efficiency, it's about creativity.
I've been using computer sequencers and midi equipment for 14 years. I find
it quite a boring process, thinking in terms of numbers and values (on the
computer) and using other peoples sounds (midi modules and sample CD's).
I eventually got into modulars and bought a Fenix, a Serge panel and started
putting together a Modcan system.
When I bought my small Buchla system I found it to be more intuitive than
anything else I was using. For melodies, the patching is very straight
forward. The 'keyboard' is completely open ended. For example, I can set the
pitch controls to a scale of my own invention and just see what happens. I
can set the pitch controls to the exact melody I want, working from the
lowest touch plate to the top or vice versa. I can set the pitch row A to
play a melody and set the pitch row B (controlling a second VCO) to play the
exact same melody, except with the odd note as a harmony.
Anyway, the open ended nature of the instrument is inspiring (even in the
role you seem to doubt it can perform).
I could go on, but why bore everyone?
CW

Greetings from L.A.!  Been driving all day.  :-P

Chris wrote:

>I could go on, but why bore everyone?<

Well, I, for one, am not bored!

The reason I asked why you would use a Buchla is that I know and 
know of several people who do what you do---NONE of them use analog 
except for window dressing to impress clients.  Time is money. Who 
has the time to diddle with patches and record monophonically when 
you can push a button and play with all ten fingers?  Given the 
schedules involved, I don't understand how or why you would choose 
analog.  It's kind of like being asked to turn in a script in two 
weeks and using a quill and inkwell to turn it out.

BTW, please forgive any errors you may see.  This "guest screen" has 
a weird "ergonomic" keyboard and a screen that's a good 3.5 feet 
away!

johnm

>If you are referring to the 258 oscillators, I can see
> that they are hard to get to track together, because they only have
> variable scale CV inputs, but it is possible.
In fact I'm using 258 Oscillators with NO PROBLEMS whatsoever.
As I've stated before, I can position tunings across my touchplate keyboard
over a wide scale (at least more than 1 octave if need be) and each
oscillator keeps in tune (or as close as any Moog OSC) perfectly well.
I'm wondering if Konkuro is thinking in terms of lab test conditions. From
note to note there are often *minute* differences in pitch between my Buchla
Oscillators. It's hardly perceptible, but gives you that fat analogue
texture that you don't get with virtual analogue or digital instruments.
Just to stress, my melodies don't sound raw or out of control as far as
pitch and tuning are concerned. They sound no different from any other
1970's analogue sound source.
>> Even a PAIA 2700 oscillator can be used accurately
>> with a sequencer, as each note is individually set.
I don't understand that logic.
Konkuro, from your comments about dance music and the Buchla (which you've
never used) I really don't think you know what you're talking about.

> Time is money. Who
> has the time to diddle with patches and record monophonically when
> you can push a button and play with all ten fingers? 

Ooo...I could go on and on about this one...

If you're doing any type symphonic simulations, playing with all ten 
fingers is the last thing you want to do. String section? Not gonna 
sound right unless 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th violin parts are all played 
separately. Same for any other section.

Even if you're not doing "symphonic" and are using "synthy" voices, it's 
still more expressive and interesting to build tracks up one part at the 
time. You learn your gear and you learn to move fast.

Sure, you could plop all ten fingers down on preset #27 and let the 
resulting pad morph away for 30 seconds and "that's good enough for this 
scene, let's move on" but what you just did sounds just like 1273 other 
folks that are trying to get scoring work as well. Keep that up and 
there'll be no distinguishing you from the next guy in line.

Now, if you're doing "pop/dance/radio.." type stuff and just need a pad 
in there or some e-piano comping, fine, 10 fingers. Go for it. But 
you'll *still* have a better sounding track if you don't go that route.

For the commercial and soundtrack work that I do - I manage to use my 
modular on almost every track. I don't want to sound like everybody else 
and keep using the same sample library/presets all the time. This helps 
give me an more individual voice - literally and figuratively - than 
those that don't take the time.

I may not be rich, but I get nice checks from ASCAP and I'm happy with 
the work that I do and most of my clients are repeat business, so I must 
be doing something right.

The knobs and blinking lights are *not* window dressing to impress 
clients. They're another tool to be used in the creative process of 
shaping just the sound you need to fit the job your doing.

My two cents worth anyway...

-- 
Les Mizzell
--------------------------------------------------
Certe, toto, sentio nos in kansate non iam adesse
--------------------------------------------------

> The reason I asked why you would use a Buchla is that I know and
> know of several people who do what you do---NONE of them use analog
> except for window dressing to impress clients.  Time is money. Who
> has the time to diddle with patches and record monophonically when
> you can push a button and play with all ten fingers?
OK, fair enough.
*A lot* of the soundtrack work I hear sounds depressingly generic.
There are a couple of sample CD's by Spectrasonics, 'Distorted Reality' and
'Distorted Reality 2'. I own both, try and use them sparingly.
I hear those samples/patches EVERYDAY on tv and film scores. Often the
composer has written an entire cue with two DR patches!
I'm never going to be a great Hollywood composer.....I don't want to be, but
I yearn for the 60's and 70's when film music was truly contemporary,
Bernard Herrman, Nino Rota, Ennio Morricone, Quincy Jones, Herbie
Hancock.....even John Carpenter.
Over the last few years I've been hired for mainstream TV shows, but I've
argued with directors over the heavy rock guitar they want every time there
is an action sequence, or the request for a bit of saxophone during the love
scene, the comedy music just to nudge the audience into realising they're
supposed to laugh. I guess I realised I wasn't cut out for 'prime time'.
Instead I've carved out a little niche with young documentary film makers. I
use my knowledge of dance music, my years in rock music, my training in
classical music and my collection of analogue synths, to try and realise the
music they are looking for. It's a lot more time consuming than switching on
a few midi modules, but a lot more satisfying and at the end of the day,
good for business.
CW

Interesting comments Les. They mirror my experiences.
> Sure, you could plop all ten fingers down on preset #27 and let the
> resulting pad morph away for 30 seconds and "that's good enough for this
> scene, let's move on" but what you just did sounds just like 1273 other
> folks
Unfortunately, Konkuro is right, a lot of people work that way. In fact,
despite his enormous modular synth walls, I'm yet to hear a distinctive Hans
Zimmer score.
One composer who seems to use his modular gear is Mark Isham.

I wrote:

>>Even a PAIA 2700 oscillator can be used accurately
with a sequencer, as each note is individually set.<<

>I don't understand that logic.<

A keyboard is essentially a voltage divider and consequently 
requires the oscillator to track accurately. With a sequencer, 
however, you adust the voltage of each stage or key individually. 
That's why even the cheapest oscillator can be used.  From your 
description, it sounded like you weren't using a keyboard with your 
Buchla, but automatic control.

>Konkuro, from your comments about dance music and the Buchla (which 
you've never used) I really don't think you know what you're talking 
about.<

FWIW, I played with Mike Peake's buchla a bit when he brought it to 
my pad.  I stand by my comment about synthesizers like the Buchla 
and Wiard being used (outside of atonal) for techno and dance and 
other sequenced stuff. I'm sure melodic, played-by-a-human stuff is 
out there, but I've yet to hear it.  Still waiting for Switched-On 
Buchla and The Well Tempered Wiard.   :-)  Could be a long wait.

>Unfortunately, Konkuro is right, a lot of people work that way.<

Your post and Les's post were quite interesting.  It would be nice 
if more people worked that way (even nicer if they ditched 
electronic altogether), but schedules don't allow it in most cases. 
It's even more horrifying to consider that we have an entire 
generation that has grown up on canned scores, so they *expect* to 
hear banal, sampled 1-keyboard garbage.  BTW, don't you just love 
how producers will spend millions on a movie, then get a single 
person with a keyboard to produce the "score?"  Drives me nuts.  And 
don't even get me started on all the bad Foley digital synths have 
resulted in!

> In fact, despite his enormous modular synth walls, I'm yet to hear 
a distinctive Hans Zimmer score.<

Window dressing.  But what about his Prince of Egypt score?  That is 
beautiful!

johnm (who can barely read the screen on this L.A. computer)

> > The reason I asked why you would use a Buchla is that I know and
> > know of several people who do what you do---NONE of them use analog
> > except for window dressing to impress clients.  Time is money. Who
> > has the time to diddle with patches and record monophonically when
> > you can push a button and play with all ten fingers?

As a film composer like Chris, I can honestly say that I really don't
give a crap how anybody else does this job.  

Years ago, I saw the trend in the music industry - everybody had a
garage sale in December, selling off this year's instruments so that
we had money buy the new gear at NAMM in January;  then race was on to
be the first to use the stuff on projects.

Is this the pattern of the modern day virtuoso?  I think not.

On my last project (Kingdom Hopsital), I produced over 5 hours of
music in 3 months.  I used the Wiard on each and every episode.  Do
most of my peers do this?  No.  Does this indicate that someone is in
error?

I suppose that if I were to play trumpet on my scores (the way that
Mark Isham does), it would be hours and hours of wasted time on my
part.  Why?  Because I don't play the trumpet!

All film composers use computers to record their music, so, when
virtual synthesizers came around, it was logical for them to buy them.
 Most of the film community are not synthesists, in the classic sense.
 They have a qualified interest in synthesis.  So, when products come
out with vast libraries of "pro-quality" loops, etc., it is a
convenience to what already is a tedious task for them.  But not for
me.  I love this stuff, and my peer group remark at the sound of my
music (in other words, it has made a difference).

It is not wasted of time, because, like any good player, I PRACTICE. 
I play these instruments all the time.  When I am not scoring a
picture, I am modifying the studio, sending modules back for repair -
I love this stuff the way that others love there guitars.

What Chris is doing is simple - what you don't use, you loose.  If you
intend to be any good at this electronic music thing, you have got to
use every day - not just as something that you do in your spare time.

As you succeed at film scoring, you have less and less spare time, so
I have no intention of spending the majority of my life with
Spectrasonic libraries when I can spend it with likes of Grant and Paul.

No contest.


Gary

If it's the difference between loving what I do or getting on the same
treadmill, wasting away years of my life becoming an expert of
libraries that 


> OK, fair enough.
> *A lot* of the soundtrack work I hear sounds depressingly generic.
> There are a couple of sample CD's by Spectrasonics, 'Distorted
Reality' and
> 'Distorted Reality 2'. I own both, try and use them sparingly.
> I hear those samples/patches EVERYDAY on tv and film scores. Often the
> composer has written an entire cue with two DR patches!
> I'm never going to be a great Hollywood composer.....I don't want to
be, but
> I yearn for the 60's and 70's when film music was truly contemporary,
> Bernard Herrman, Nino Rota, Ennio Morricone, Quincy Jones, Herbie
> Hancock.....even John Carpenter.
> Over the last few years I've been hired for mainstream TV shows, but
I've
> argued with directors over the heavy rock guitar they want every
time there
> is an action sequence, or the request for a bit of saxophone during
the love
> scene, the comedy music just to nudge the audience into realising
they're
> supposed to laugh. I guess I realised I wasn't cut out for 'prime time'.
> Instead I've carved out a little niche with young documentary film
makers. I
> use my knowledge of dance music, my years in rock music, my training in
> classical music and my collection of analogue synths, to try and
realise the
> music they are looking for. It's a lot more time consuming than
switching on

> a few midi modules, but a lot more satisfying and at the end of the day,
> good for business.
> CW

"If you're doing any type symphonic simulations, playing with all ten
fingers is the last thing you want to do. String section? Not gonna
sound right unless 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th violin parts are all played
separately. Same for any other section.

Even if you're not doing "symphonic" and are using "synthy" voices, it's
still more expressive and interesting to build tracks up one part at the
time. You learn your gear and you learn to move fast."

Hi Les

this is exactly how I approach most polyphonic work. sure time is money and
immediacy is important when composing sometimes, so I usually pull up
a polyphonic sound in Reaktor when composing, but then when its time
to commit to audio I often split the midi into individual monophonic lines
and go to my Serge-Modcan-MOTM system and spend a lot of time patching 
up a monophonic sound and record 1 layer at a time. I will often subtly change
LFO modulation speeds & envelope times for each pass and it *really* does make 
a difference. Sure it takes longer this way but the results are worth it and its more
enjoyable too... I also adopt this approach using Garritan Orchestral Strings - its 
vital for more realism...as I'm not hampered by tight deadlines on my own material I guess
I have the luxury of time more than most TV/Film composers, so I admire folks
like youself, Chris & Gary for striving for something a little different from the norm' in this
field.

KD

> A keyboard is essentially a voltage divider and consequently
> requires the oscillator to track accurately. With a sequencer,
> however, you adust the voltage of each stage or key individually.
> That's why even the cheapest oscillator can be used.
That works if you're using one oscillator only (which I rarely find myself
doing). If you use more than one oscillator, both have to track successfully
AND the sequencer has to spit out accurate voltages. In fact my Steiner
Parker Synthacon (with built in keyboard) is A LOT more problematic
tuning-wise than my Buchla.
The reason I don't use 'automatic control' with my Buchla is I sold all of
my analogue sequencers a couple of years ago because I just wasn't using
them enough.
>. I'm sure melodic, played-by-a-human stuff is
> out there, but I've yet to hear it.  Still waiting for Switched-On
> Buchla and The Well Tempered Wiard.   :-)  Could be a long wait.
I don't think you need to keep bringing up 'The Well Tempered..' or
'Switched On....', in my opinion they were the WORST thing that ever
happened to modular synthesisers. Although I agree, you should be able to
play melodic, western tunings on a Buchla or Moog, to concentrate on
mimicking classical instruments is to miss about 90% of the synthesisers
potential. 
When dance music is mentioned, the term 'Techno' most often rears it's head.
The Urban/Dance music genre has now splintered in a myriad of directions. I
know a few musicians personally in the genre who use Pro Tools (not known
for it's midi/sequencing features) and who play everything by hand, after
which they will cut and paste the phrases in a repetitive fashion (ala dance
music convention). The purely programmed element still exists in the drums
and percussion, but bands like Groove Armada, Jazzanova and Unkle actually
sound more like BANDS than a room full of synthesisers and sequencers
'untouched by human hands'.
> It would be nice 
> if more people worked that way (even nicer if they ditched
> electronic altogether), but schedules don't allow it in most cases.
I actually think budgets are MUCH the bigger issue.
In the 70's it was the norm to use groups of musicians (like orchestras).
When I first started 12 years ago, film directors and production companies
actually saw it as a mark of quality if the music score had an obvious live,
human sound to it. Nowadays, especially since 'reality tv' and the success
of pop music on Hollywood film soundtracks, budgeting for original music is
viewed almost as folly by many in the industry.
In the UK, tv companies can use pre-recorded music with very little
financial outlay and merely by signing a few release forms. I now find
myself not competing with Hans Zimmer or Elliot Gouldentahl, but Arvo Part,
Steve Reich and Miles Davis...............composers not only of genius, but
ones who had unlimited time and resources in which to produce their
recordings.
I liked Gary's comments.
It IS harder to justify spending a day building up an analogue soundscape
when I can dial one up almost instantly from 'Atmosphere' (Spectrasonics),
especially as I'm almost always working effectively for $200 a day. I do it
mostly out of personal pride, for my own satisfaction, but also as Gary, Les
and myself have already pointed out, it's what separates you out from the
crowd and is therefore good for business.
>> In fact, despite his enormous modular synth walls, I'm yet to hear
> a distinctive Hans Zimmer score.<
> 
> Window dressing.  But what about his Prince of Egypt score?  That is
> beautiful!
I was talking about 'distinctive', especially in terms of his VAST modular
synth collection. I actually like 'The Thin Red Line' (have I got that
right?), but there's nothing that distinguishes that from any other
Hollywood film score, other than some very good writing.
CW

This is a great discussion, by the way. I know it's not Wiard specific, 
but.....


> Years ago, I saw the trend in the music industry - everybody had a
> garage sale in December, selling off this year's instruments so that
> we had money buy the new gear at NAMM in January;  

...and you end up with 379 TV Shows, documentaries, movies or album 
projects that had "Digital Native Dance" on them all at the same time.

I used to do tons of commercials for the ad agencies here in town. A 
couple of events finally convinced me to tell them all to go to hell, 
and I don't work for any of them anymore. Mainly, it was the total lack 
of creativity on their part. They had no ability to consider the fact 
that something that sounded a little different might be just what their 
spot actually needed to stand out from the rest. I got sick of cloning 
"pop song #28" day after day. It got so bad that I had a clause in my 
contracts with them that stated that since it was a work for hire (that 
was another reason - in this state the word "residual" meant "never 
mind, we'll find somebody else"), *they* and only they assumed any 
potential copyright problems, which essentially was what they had me 
doing - copying.

Seemed a shame that I won a state Addy award in another state for "Best 
Score and Sound Design" and nobody in my home town could get past having 
their spot sound like "What's Love Got to Do With It"!

I now only take on the projects that interest me and give me some degree 
of control over the creative process. I may not be making as much money, 
but I'm a heck of a lot happier and that's all that matters to me.

 > As a film composer like Chris, I can honestly say that I really don't
 > give a crap how anybody else does this job.

Agreed. If everybody did it exactly alike every show on TV would sound 
like "Days of Our Lives".



-- 
Les Mizzell
--------------------------------------------------
Certe, toto, sentio nos in kansate non iam adesse
--------------------------------------------------

> ...and you end up with 379 TV Shows, documentaries, movies or album
> projects that had "Digital Native Dance" on them all at the same time.
LOL.
Yeah I remember that.
The same is becoming true of the samples on 'Distorted Reality' IMO.
The same guy is probably responsible for both (talk about World
domination!!!), Eric Persing, former sound designer at Roland and now head
dude at Spectrasonics.
Yeah I can't do ad's, in fact I'm on the point of giving up on tv altogether
and going back to performance.
I'm not thick skinned enough to spend days agonising over 1 minute's worth
of music, only to get one line of feedback from the director, usually "I
don't like the bass drum" or "can you change one note?". The occasional "wow
I really like it, but can you change the bass drum?" would be a dream
reaction for me. A dream I'm still waiting to happen. LOL
Advertising jingles..........
Neil Dorfsman once told me a telling tale.
He's engineered and mixed artists such as Bruce Springsteen and Dire
Straits.
He was called in to mix a Wrigley's commercial. Despite the music being 40
seconds long or something, he spent the day EQing, balancing and generally
agonising over the mix (as you do). When he thought it sounded pretty good,
the client was called in. After playback, Neil turned round and said "what
do you think?". The client looked kind of down and replied "I
dunno.........it just doesn't say GUM".
Doh!

> In the UK, tv companies can use pre-recorded music with very little
> financial outlay and merely by signing a few release forms. I now find
> myself not competing with Hans Zimmer or Elliot Gouldentahl, but Arvo Part,
> Steve Reich and Miles Davis...............composers not only of genius, but
> ones who had unlimited time and resources in which to produce their
> recordings.

I find myself competing with Garageband and Acid!  The few production 
houses here, and the ad agencies figured "heck, we can do our OWN music! 
Why pay somebody?" and that's what they're into now! What's funny is 
you'll be watching TV and two spots will come on, and they'll BOTH have 
the same exact bass line in them, but different drums, or the exact 
guitar part all the way through, but different bass. I laugh every time!


> I liked Gary's comments.
> It IS harder to justify spending a day building up an analogue soundscape
> when I can dial one up almost instantly from 'Atmosphere' (Spectrasonics),

I use ABSynth a lot - but my personal rule, once I got comfortable with 
it - is to use *no* presets. Ever. I force myself to start with a blank 
slate every time I fire it up. It and the modular seem to like each 
other in the mix.

I'd be a liar if I said I never use presets or samples or anything - 
sometimes all they want is a soft piano melody with some quiet strings 
in the background - but they're not going to pay for live strings. So, 
you use what fits. It's how you use the sample library that makes the 
difference though...


-- 
Les Mizzell
--------------------------------------------------
Certe, toto, sentio nos in kansate non iam adesse
--------------------------------------------------