Chris Randall: Musician, Writer, User Interface Designer, Inventor, Photographer, Complainer. Not necessarily in that order.
February 9, 2008

The 10 Commandments Of Grindhouse...

by Chris Randall

So, there are at least seven distinct forms of house music that I can discern. Unfortunately, none of them does what I want right now, so I've taken it upon myself to invent a new sub-genre, which we will call Grindhouse. The problem with making your own genre is that it isn't actually a genre until more than one artist does it. As long as it's just one person or group, it is only "quirky" or "eccentric," or the worst of all, "unclassifiable."

Like any sub-genre, our new style needs a set of rules, so a particular song or artist can be classified as such. In that light, I propose the following Ten Commandments Of Grindhouse, a paradigm set for our new genre. I intend this genre to be entirely open source, so the Commandments may be altered as a result of discussion, here or elsewhere. But we have to start somewhere, right? In that light, here's what I submit:

1: Thou Shalt Have A Monster Foot. Of course, the root of all house music is a 909 kick in a four-on-the-floor pattern. Grindhouse, since it is a sub-set of house, will have the same. However, our foot will be large. It should dominate the track entirely. In that light, the foot should have a healthy dose of plate reverb. But it needs to start life as a 909-flavored kick; that really goes without saying.

2: Thou Shalt Eschew Chord Progressions. Pick a fucking note and hammer that shit in to the ground. Chord progressions are for trance, and we hates trance.

3: Thou Shalt Lovingly Embrace Distortion. Grindhouse should be HARD. Think of it as powernoise with a more defined beat and, like, music and stuff. The square wave is your friend.

4: Thou Shalt Beat An MC About The Head And Shoulders With A Blunt Object. We are of the opinion that two things are true: a DJ knows how to spin records and the crowd knows how to dance. We don't need some meth-addled MC Cul-De-Sac up on the stage shouting at people, and asking for rewinds, and all that bullshit.

5: Thou Shalt Move At A Punk-Rock Clip. Grindhouse, because it is an aggressive form of house, shall be on the speedy side. Your happy place is between 140 and 150. You dip below 138 at your peril.

6: Thou Shalt Smash Thy VCR. Movie samples are so 1989. They shall be avoided like the plague that they are.

7: Thou Shalt Place Thy Bass In The Driver Seat. In Grindhouse, our bassline and our melody are the same motherfucking thing. Stack for attack.

8: Thou Shalt Glitch Thy Percussion. If it isn't a foot, it gets all fucked up. Get your favorite beat mangler and put it on every track.

9: Thou Shalt Restrain Thyself From 16-measure Snare Rolls. Grindhouse has sudden transitions. If someone wants gradual dynamics so they know when to spin their glowsticks and raise their arms, might we point them towards Ibeza?

10: Thou Shalt Break It Down. The breakdowns in Grindhouse, an essentially pad-free environment, shall be rhythmic in nature, with the glitchy beats.

There we have it. I'm essentially describing a punkier, glitchier form of house that is hard as hell. The next step is for the Analog Industries community to discuss and fine-tune our ruleset, and then make and release a comp. Obviously, a little audio example would help, so here 'tis, an intro and a couple go-rounds of a main section. In it, the major points above are described, I think. Discuss.

EDIT: I've made changes to the MP3 to take in to account the incredibly helpful suggestions offered forth. Here 'tis. I made the lead/bass more grindish, less ravish, and the offending 909 hat has been bit-reduced in to submission.

Note that, despite evidence to the contrary, I wasn't saying "hey, here's a grandiose idea that will change the face of electronic music." Rather, it was an attempt at ironic humor. I guess I should have put the sarcasm tags around the whole post. My thinking was that most electronic music genres spring from thin air, via someone coming up with an interesting idea that is somewhat outside a genre, and about 500 other producers trying to cash in on the sound. I thought it would be funny to create a ready-made genre, with malice aforethought. Perhaps I should have said that in the beginning of the post, as exactly two responders have got the joke. I have to say that, for most of you, subtlety is not your strong suit.

February 9, 2008

AD Ricochet Update...

by Chris Randall

We're in the home stretch now. After fighting with the AU and PPC shit all week, due to some wankery in Apple's latest round of updates, everything appears to be running smooth on the OS X side of things. Adam is working on the manual this weekend, while I run the beta test, and assuming all goes well with both, we'll have a multi-tap delay for sale here in a couple days.

I have to say, on a personal note, this plug has taken a bit (okay, a lot) longer to make than most of our other offerings, but it is well worth it. While it seems rather simple on the face of things (and wasn't that the point?) there is a lot going on under the hood of this one. Unlike the everything-and-the-sink approach of something like Delay Designer or PSP 608, we narrowed the focus down to the most usable feature set. As such, I'll be the first to admit that Ricochet has a definite sound to it, unlike those two effects, which only have "vibe" if you program it in to them. This is the result of not having controls for every possible parameter, but rather making conscious design decisions, and only baring the controls that you literally can't live without.

Also, we departed from the normal multi-tap paradigm, where each tap is treated as a unique event (this is what leads to the masses of controls in most software multi-taps) and treated the five taps as a single event for the purposes of setting the time. The result of this is that, to people that use multi-taps a lot already, the initial programming environment might be a bit confusing. But once you spend a minute or two fooling with it, you'll see that it makes perfect sense to do it this way. You just have to think of the grid as the Event, and the five taps as the parts of that Event that you can control; you can also determine when the Event will happen relative to the initial sound. It sounds confusing, but a little hands-on experience will make it immediately obvious.

Anyways, enough equivocating. We've put a lot of work in to this plug, and are rather proud of it. I look forward (with a little trepidation) to the general response, but we're generally confident that we did the right thing here, even though we swam against the general plan a little bit. Look for it on Tuesday or Wednesday, barring any unforeseen problems. It'll be US$49.00, like all our bigger plugs.

February 8, 2008


by Chris Randall

That's "What would Flava Flav do?" if you were curious. There's an interesting article here wherein tests were made of the relative accuracy of various drum machines, time-wise. Not surprisingly, the MPC3000 is tight as a gnat's ass. Equally unsurprising is that the MachineDrum fares quite poorly. Interestingly, their tests showed almost exactly the same results as my own (~100 samples via MIDI, and the dreaded 128 sample hiccup via the internal clock.)

Anyway, some interesting info there, if you're the sort that worries about such things. I'm not, personally. That's what "Quantize Audio" was made for.

February 7, 2008

Atomica Gravity single now available...

by Chris Randall

The Atomica Project's new single "Gravity" from the forthcoming album "Greyscale" is now available in shopPOSI for purchase, in VBR MP3 and FLAC. Enjoy.

February 6, 2008

Gretsch: Old 'n' Busted or New Hotness?

by Chris Randall

I've been pondering getting a Duo-Jet for a while now, and I think once tax time is over, I'm gonna take the plunge. My question is thus: has anyone here played an early '60s Duo-Jet, and will the Heavens open forth and Shine all sorts of sticky, gooey goodness on me should I decide to spend c. $3K for an oldie, versus the $1.5K to $2K for a current one?

Or, in other words, is a "real" '62 $1000 better than a new '62? Gruhn has a '57 for $2650 and a '63 for $4K. I'm sure if I shopped about, I could find more, but they'd all be in that range, no doubt. Obviously, the older ones are going to hold their value better; that goes without saying. Since I'm not as familiar with Gretsch guitars as with other brands, I don't know. Feelings? Thoughts? Talk me off the ledge?


Displaying 911 to 915 of 1903 available blog entries.

Page 183 of 381