Why I'm WILD about horns and Dupstep

[zefrenm]

For all those that knock Dupstep as a novelty with its bass runs and odd harmonics and rhythms. There was this little novelty call Ragtime jazz born into American popular music during the spring of 1917. Hmm where people see the future of music I see a repeat of efforts of the past re born. Even Dupstep’s harmonic sound strangely related to the barrel house low downs of Jelly Roll Morton’s Habana rhythms and tempo. ( exp Jelly Roll Morton’s “The Crave”)

Above is an Example of the work I do with my personal collection of 78 rpms. Always for free even though I’ve fighting the Man on copyrights at times.

Where does the love of horns begin to become an obsession? I really don’t know its been in my blood since I was small when I fell in love with a overplayed 8 track of time life music of Rhapsody in blue. I little song written by Gerswin commissioned by the self proclaimed King of Jazz but master of American popular music for over 3 decades Paul Whiteman. Whiteman himself was a child of Ragtime and classical. So what does this all mean?

I <3 so, rhapsody blue = 8-track = magnetic recording = electric 78 rpm = acoustic 78 rpm = Gerswin = Paul Whiteman = jazz = classical = ragtime = march = 4/4 times music + 100 years = techno = bass = good bass = Bill Fitzmaurice tuba 60s and at each interval there was a horn involved.

Here are some observances in my quest to harness the acoustic 78 rpm. All measurement are approximates.

[88h88]

While the tempo of the track in the video is correct (~140bpm) there's little to even remotely connect it to the first dubstep tracks and even less to connect it to the stuff being churned out today.

The oooooooold stuff was an offshoot of UK/2 step garage, dropped out 99% of vocal and superflulous beats making it something to get lost in whilst you were just swaying back and forth in a dank as hell sweaty basement club full of ganja smoke. It has elements of drum and bass, grime, dub reggae... The early stuff is just empty, sparse, almost minimalist in construction as it was mostly about the sub bass rattling your chest rather than the horrible rave-stab midbass shit that's popular in the US.

History lesson. This is dubstep, 99% of the current stuff is related but not true dubstep. Anyone saying otherwise doesn't know what they're talking about which is about right really.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LbAjyKgN2Y

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-rQC4Zgco4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlEyR27fvGc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6pTSGvp7T8

[zefrenm]

While the tempo of the track in the video is correct (~140bpm) there's little to even remotely connect it to the first dubstep tracks and even less to connect it to the stuff being churned out today.

The oooooooold stuff was an offshoot of UK/2 step garage, dropped out 99% of vocal and superflulous beats making it something to get lost in whilst you were just swaying back and forth in a dank as hell sweaty basement club full of ganja smoke. It has elements of drum and bass, grime, dub reggae... The early stuff is just empty, sparse, almost minimalist in construction as it was mostly about the sub bass rattling your chest rather than the horrible rave-stab midbass shit that's popular in the US.

History lesson. This is dubstep, 99% of the current stuff is related but not true dubstep. Anyone saying otherwise doesn't know what they're talking about which is about right really.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LbAjyKgN2Y

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-rQC4Zgco4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlEyR27fvGc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6pTSGvp7T8

Yup they sound like Jelly roll Morton Tangos from 1909 to the 1920's in harmony and tempo.

[Gregory East]

The geometry of the mechanical horn phonograph is more than a little similar to the DR series. Nothing new under the sun as they say.

Compression kills expression. I was blown away this afternoon, by a self released CD by a kiwi band, how dynamic the sound was compared with commercial radio hits.

As for ragtime jazz being the forebear of dubstep, I can kind of see where you're coming from but I doubt any musical geneology exists beyond sharing the 12 semitones and 4 beats to a bar.

[zefrenm]

The geometry of the mechanical horn phonograph is more than a little similar to the DR series. Nothing new under the sun as they say.

Compression kills expression. I was blown away this afternoon, by a self released CD by a kiwi band, how dynamic the sound was compared with commercial radio hits.

As for ragtime jazz being the forebear of dubstep, I can kind of see where you're coming from but I doubt any musical geneology exists beyond sharing the 12 semitones and 4 beats to a bar.

working musical genealogy looks like this

American rave dup = Dupstep = uk based experiments = Reggae + Electro glitch (hard goth samples) = Caribbean folk music = french folk music = habanera sound = New Orleans tangos = New Orleans non-white jazz players = recorded white jazz players


(tracks recorded pre 1920 were recorded at a slower speed and the band rushed on early waxes because the often would play songs longer then the records could record. Often the record would be played back faster than recorded and the fast+fast one steps became the rage until songs were shorten and solos cut. Some band transposed the music in their heads (most early jazz player never read music) so even at the faster play back the song would be more or less on key.)

[Titanium Hand]

Interesting theory re: dubstep.

The 2nd song you posted 88h88 by digital mystic, the verse or hook (I'm unsure of the terminology) has a very familiar sounding sample in it. I cant quite put my finger on it, I think it comes from a rap song sung by a really grotesque looking bloke. Any ideas on its point of origin, or is this the song it originated only to be bastardised by others?

Zefrenm - ragtime is cool, I reckon the old style dancing would have been a whole lot of fun. Interesting, the resembalance gregory pointed out in the ancient horn and the DR too

[wounded horse]

I know this beat. When my boy at about 10 was learning drums.

[SirNickity]

Compression kills expression. I was blown away this afternoon, by a self released CD by a kiwi band, how dynamic the sound was compared with commercial radio hits.

While this is true in the sense that most commercial music released today is marching steadily towards a 0dBFS square wave, compression can be (well, is) actually used to enhance dynamics instead.

Consider two examples:

First, an instrument, like a vocal line or drum kit. Typically, you would use compression with a slow attack (50-200ms, depending), then clamp down to keep the sound from overwhelming the mix. This quick transient burst helps the brain notice the sound, without it having to be foreground. In this way, every word or snare hit has a moment of bite, then settles back into its place. Without the compression, the sibilance of a voice would get buried in the din. Drums have very high transient levels, but it's extremely short -- typically inaudible in a mix -- and will tend to sound dull.

Now take this same principle and apply it to a bus, or a mixdown. The first note of a song, or when the beat drops out and comes back full-force, is accentuated by a little compression. You'll hit the limiters at first with a hot average level, then the compression kicks in and pulls the average back down by a few dB. Without compression, that grand entrance will be lacking huevos rancheros.

In rock (or indeed most any dense popular music genre), compression is necessary for the sake of clarity. In orchestral or jazz, or some (but not all) acoustic folk, you might consider it optional in favor of the realism and you-are-there spaciousness. At low volumes, you'll appreciate it either way.

In the case of your self-released album there, if it was professionally done, there is no doubt considerable use of compression. Just not overbearing limiting in the mastering.

[zefrenm]

While this is true in the sense that most commercial music released today is marching steadily towards a 0dBFS square wave, compression can be (well, is) actually used to enhance dynamics instead.

Consider two examples:

First, an instrument, like a vocal line or drum kit. Typically, you would use compression with a slow attack (50-200ms, depending), then clamp down to keep the sound from overwhelming the mix. This quick transient burst helps the brain notice the sound, without it having to be foreground. In this way, every word or snare hit has a moment of bite, then settles back into its place. Without the compression, the sibilance of a voice would get buried in the din. Drums have very high transient levels, but it's extremely short -- typically inaudible in a mix -- and will tend to sound dull.

Now take this same principle and apply it to a bus, or a mixdown. The first note of a song, or when the beat drops out and comes back full-force, is accentuated by a little compression. You'll hit the limiters at first with a hot average level, then the compression kicks in and pulls the average back down by a few dB. Without compression, that grand entrance will be lacking huevos rancheros.

In rock (or indeed most any dense popular music genre), compression is necessary for the sake of clarity. In orchestral or jazz, or some (but not all) acoustic folk, you might consider it optional in favor of the realism and you-are-there spaciousness. At low volumes, you'll appreciate it either way.

In the case of your self-released album there, if it was professionally done, there is no doubt considerable use of compression. Just not overbearing limiting in the mastering.

Personally I find it disheartening that there are some techno and dup tracks out there where the strongest fundamental of the bass and the “um teenth thousandth harmonic “of the reverberation filter are the same -0.1dB signal level. Yikes.

Take a raw modern recorded file and (+)lossy compression + digital audio filters +Compression (result )= the Left and right channels which are full of phase distortions .
You can’t perceive this in frequencies higher than 500Hz but at 50 Hz and 25Hz, Whoa trouble. In full range stereo cabs this means a weird sense of loss when listening to the lows lol. (uh oh audiophile soap box speech)
but wait we got crossovers. (duh?)
Well in such a case, which channel becomes the master bass channel do you choose? Left or right? which is the truer bass? (Industry uses the left as a default) what happen to the phase distortions in the opposing channel? Will they not bleed over because on the roll-over range. Either way you’re screwed because when you amplify music a small error gets exponentially worst the harder your drive the sound.
In the Dark aged days of Record LPs 78 rpm and tape mastering, engineers worries about surface noise, so they had to keep a nominal level of signal to overcome the hiss or scratching of the record or tape.
Nor could they afford to allow the loudest passages to overrun the maximum levels of the medium. (records the groove would destroy the neighboring grooves or in tapes incur the wrath of saturation distortion)
So in practice the average levels were set with 70% of the available dynamic range was used for mids and highs. The remaining 30% was reserved for bass, this give a good level playing field for all types of music. Compression limiting equipment was invented to keep the dynamic ranges in check when they first came into use. (fathers of modern drum kits Tony S’barbaro[1917] & Gene Krupra [1930s]use of bass drums were quiet loud in live performances but had to feather their performances or omit solos because no workable compression limiter was available until the middle of the century. )
SO why the tangent into bass, well it’s always about bass. Well it’s still the dark days and in order to prevent horrible phase distortions in stereo LPs and tapes, master waxers/tapers removed the bass from both channels and summed the bass into equal parts Left and Right. So the same signal will be in both channels to help in play back. (really a forgotten art) really really forgotten.

If your familiar with your audio programs such as audacity. Take a 5 sec snippet of your favorite techno track with bass. Run a low pass filter at -12db and 125Hz and look at the resulting bass waveform’s left and right channel, that’s coming out of your cabs. If the track was master correctly the left and right channel should be the same.
But that is not the case since the 1990s when most the golden generation of waxers died or retired.

So back to the present. And the conclusion

Buy a freaking crossover that has an active Bass summing amplifier to overcome the digital age’s version of Mastering, lossy compression, and digital filters.

[Sydney]

[In rock (or indeed most any dense popular music genre), compression is necessary for the sake of clarity.

Thank goodness there are still artists and producers that have fought to preserve subtlety, nuance, and dynamic range rather than yield to the popular commercial practice of squashing to a "square wave".

[Gregory East]

I prefer a bit of reverb on a snare to squashing the tits off it.

[Harley]

I prefer a bit of reverb on a snare to squashing the tits off it.

A snare drum with tits?...The War Office is not going to believe when I say I want one for Christmas

[guitarkeys.com]

Compression kills expression. I was blown away this afternoon, by a self released CD by a kiwi band, how dynamic the sound was compared with commercial radio hits.

While this is true in the sense that most commercial music released today is marching steadily towards a 0dBFS square wave, compression can be (well, is) actually used to enhance dynamics instead.

Consider two examples:

First, an instrument, like a vocal line or drum kit. Typically, you would use compression with a slow attack (50-200ms, depending), then clamp down to keep the sound from overwhelming the mix. This quick transient burst helps the brain notice the sound, without it having to be foreground. In this way, every word or snare hit has a moment of bite, then settles back into its place. Without the compression, the sibilance of a voice would get buried in the din. Drums have very high transient levels, but it's extremely short -- typically inaudible in a mix -- and will tend to sound dull.

Now take this same principle and apply it to a bus, or a mixdown. The first note of a song, or when the beat drops out and comes back full-force, is accentuated by a little compression. You'll hit the limiters at first with a hot average level, then the compression kicks in and pulls the average back down by a few dB. Without compression, that grand entrance will be lacking huevos rancheros.

In rock (or indeed most any dense popular music genre), compression is necessary for the sake of clarity. In orchestral or jazz, or some (but not all) acoustic folk, you might consider it optional in favor of the realism and you-are-there spaciousness. At low volumes, you'll appreciate it either way.

In the case of your self-released album there, if it was professionally done, there is no doubt considerable use of compression. Just not overbearing limiting in the mastering.

I think someone needs to look up the definition of dynamics... lots of bad information here.

Jamie

[Sydney]

Ouch
Not pulling any punches eh

[SirNickity]

Tough claim there, sir. So let's hear where I went wrong then, eh? Always happy to learn something new.