New music - "Every Thousand Years"

[Rodney]

This is an instrumental of a song from a musical I wrote called THE WATCHER ON THE SHORE. (Other tunes from it can be found on my Profile page at Rebirth of Reason. I may put some up here later.)

It is meant to evoke the sense of a "new order of things" that periodically occurs after long stretches of time in human affairs. The listener may think of any revolutionary change while listening.

Though I am sure of the quality of the tune, my cheap software does not allow me full resources to arrange the tune as I would like.

Edited March 30, 2007 by ashleyparkerangel

[Victor Pross]

Rodney,

I see you live in Toronto. I was wondering if you have any live shows going on?

Victor

[reason.on]

Though I am sure of the quality of the tune, my cheap software does not allow me full resources to arrange the tune as I would like.

What are you using? If you are on a PC, I highly recommend:

http://www.flstudio.com

I haven't found anything more flexible in terms of the ability to arrange (and it is quite reasonably priced).

RCR

[PalePower]

Rodney,

I veeeery much enjoyed listening to this. Thank you for the description of what the song represented - it adds a whole other level of fascination to it, to be able to get inside your head and share your own perspective of events. It has a somewhat subdued, even withdrawn feel to it, which, in context of the topsy-turvy "revolution" idea, is . . .well, enlightening. I kind of feel like God, looking down over all the goings-on of his people. Or it reminds of me of introspection, too. (I hope that was something along the lines of what you were aiming for!)

Post more music, I'd love to hear it!

~Elizabeth

[Rodney]

I see you live in Toronto. I was wondering if you have any live shows going on?

Heavens no! I'm not a performer. I do play guitar some, but I use it mainly as a compositional aid.

But thank you for thinking that I could have a show! (Actually, I have performed a lot as a magician. Perhaps that is what you mean!)

[Rodney]

What are you using? If you are on a PC, I highly recommend http://www.flstudio.com.

I use Rhapsody, which is abandonware that has been replaced by Finale. I also have Finale, but it is so poorly designed and documented that I find it unusable.

I got Rhapsody for free from a flautist in an ensemble that once performed my wind band piece Anthem. And at this point, I cannot afford to buy new software or hardware (I now have no hardware but my laptop, and that's what this was arranged and partly composed on).

I'll look into FL Studio though. Thanks!

[Rodney]

Rodney,

I veeeery much enjoyed listening to this. Thank you for the description of what the song represented - it adds a whole other level of fascination to it, to be able to get inside your head and share your own perspective of events. It has a somewhat subdued, even withdrawn feel to it, which, in context of the topsy-turvy "revolution" idea, is ... well, enlightening. I kind of feel like God, looking down over all the goings-on of his people. Or it reminds of me of introspection, too. (I hope that was something along the lines of what you were aiming for!)

Thanks. I do think music attached to an interpretation is often more effective, which is why I wrote the musical. Yes, I think your sense of my intention is accurate. But I had never thought of it in those terms. In the play, it ties in with the idea of human progress viewed from a long-range perspective.

Post more music, I'd love to hear it! ~Elizabeth

OK, I will. Edited March 28, 2007 by ashleyparkerangel

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Rodney,

This is the first time I have heard your music. I like it.

Very pretty.

Maybe it was my headphones, but I would have mixed the background strings a bit further back, maybe with a bit less mediums for a bit softer, more velvety texture.

I second the motion for more.

Michael

[Rodney]

Maybe it was my headphones, but I would have mixed the background strings a bit further back, maybe with a bit less mediums for a bit softer, more velvety texture.

Thank you. One complaint I have with my present system is lack of fine control over dynamics, but I suppose I could try what you suggest. (What are "mediums"?) Edited March 28, 2007 by ashleyparkerangel

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

(What are "mediums"?)

Rodney,

This is frequency. When mid-level frequencies are too saturated, you get a tinny kind of sound something like what comes out of a small transistor radio.

Also, (but this is not in your case), it becomes difficult for the ear to distinguish instruments. This is a gripe I have about many pop recordings. The guitar, high-hat and cymbals, snare, voice, keyboard, etc., are all set in the same medium frequency range for a huge blob of sound. It is common in that kind of recording for the bass to increase his high frequencies so he can get in the middle, too, and add his contribution to the blob.

One sound engineer I worked with in Brazil (Daniel Pessanha) could do wonders with mediums, though. He used a spectrum analyzer and would thin out a small range of medium frequencies from ALL instruments when he recorded (and sometimes he would do this with several thin bandstrips of frequencies instead of a single thicker one). The way he did it, the naked ear could not perceive that anything was missing. Then, when he recorded the voice, he would place it right within those frequency ranges. That way the voice was always clear to the ear, along with the other instruments, without having to bring the voice's volume up in the mixdown. Thus the background groove could keep the excitement going and you could actually hear what the voice was singing at the same time.

Michael

[Jonathan]

Those of you who are using Macs may be interested in Apple's GarageBand program and the add-on JamPack Symphony Orchestra software. It's inexpensive, easy to use, has fairly realistic instrument sounds, and the ability to control them quite well. Here's a short phrase, first in woodwinds, then repeated in strings and then horns:

http://putstuff.putfile.com/63417/829874

(1.6MB, and you may have to click "Next Page" a couple of time to get to the download)

J

Edited March 30, 2007 by Jonathan

[Rodney]

Michael,

Sounds like a very interesting procedure. I've found myself doing something similar by clearing some space just above the tenor range so that the melody or other line could be distinguished. It works great, and seldom does it make the music sound thinner--as I sometimes fear since I often go for the "fat" sounds.

I would note, however, that in pop music you may not want clarity and separation, but a huge amorphous wash of sound such as Phil Spector used. Some records sound better that way--or maybe you get used to hearing them that way, and so you hate a cleared-up remix!

I wonder how it would sound if you simply cleared up the pitch where the melody happened to be at any given moment, so that the other sounds would always be silent where the melody note was, but nowhere else--rather than clearing out a fixed space for the tune to move around in? I should try that some time.

[Rodney]

Jonathan,

It sounded pretty good. But I have a PC and no extra money.

Another annoying thing about my software is that I cannot do a fade on any single note--there have to be multiple notes so each can be made softer than the last. However, I can at least do an end-of-song fadeout by editing the mp3 in another program.

Edited March 30, 2007 by ashleyparkerangel