I think that Final Scratch opens doors for people. Take for example a
dj/producer who doesn't want to have to spend $50 for each dubplate, doesn't
have the cash for that
nifty looking new vestax vinyl cutter, and doesn't have the connections to
get their work published.
What if their production work -- if played live--would mostly consist of
hitting play on the hard-disk recording device? I think that this
technology presents opportunities
for more original music to be played out.
Granted, I think that artists should be reimbursed for their work (ie should
get paid for their mp3s or cds or records). But for the price of the final
scratch (since I have a
computer, and have some recorded music) I can play my music in the context I
intended it to be played--on turntables for a crowd.
-geoff
>Be patient
>Ever heard of the step by step program ?
>we move slowly
>first we imitate then we innovate
>
>But i'm not gonne tell you here how to lay down you creativity on a tool
>it ain't all 'bout what's here now ;-)
>
>Mad'R
>
> > Mr. Woolums has taken the words RIGHT OUT OF MY MOUTH!!!!!
> > How advanced is a piece of equipment that can finally do today what
>certain
> > Detroit Djs could do 12 years ago?
> > Where is the progress in TALENT? All this does is make it easier for
djs
>who
> > lack the ability to do it by hand.
> > Instead of raising the bar, they lowering it and trying to step over.
> >
> > back.....Bone
> >
> >
> > >From: Yair Etziony
> > >To: "'Vince Woolums'" , "'313@hyperreal.org'"
> > ><313@hyperreal.org>
> > >Subject: RE: [313] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] everywhere
> > >Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2001 22:25:07 +0200
> > >
> > >Regards.
> > > i really enjoyed reading your stuff vince i think that u r like 90%
> > >right.
> > >most of the time we think that technology will make us more innovative
>and
> > >more creative, but alas i think technology is just making us more and
>more
> > >dependent on it.
> > > creative is something that comes from the mind not something u can
have
> > >with technology, like any new gimmik the final scratch will come and
go.
>i
> > >am not too sure that vinyls will stay for ever but i know one thing-
all
> > >the
> > >new technology stuff for dj`s is simple uncreative. they made software
>who
> > >acts as turntables ,they make cd who acts like a turntable. if
technology
> > >were really creative they would just try to immitate but to innovate
> > >something REALLY new.
> > >
> > >y/
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: Vince Woolums [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2001 8:54 PM
> > >To: 313 List
> > >Subject: re: [313] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] everywhere
> > >
> > >
> > > > i don't think you understand what final scratch is, and how de9(?)
was
> > >made.
> > > > final scratch is a tool that allows use to use two regular
turntables
> > >and
> > >a
> > > > regular mixer to control any a digital file on a computer just like
>you
> > >would a
> > > > slab of vinyl. you slow the turntable down and the digital file
slows
> > >down
> > >etc.
> > > > you do it live. it's not digital editing tool like pro tools or
peak
> > >etc.
> > > > anything you do with you do live.
> > >
> > >i'm briefed on final scratch. i've seen acquav!va use it. in addition,
> > >i'm
> > >aware of the production techniques involved in the creation of both
de9
>and
> > >closer to the edit. i'm also aware of the physics behind the
technology.
> > >i've watched these develpments rather closely.
> > >
> > >you're missing one of my points: that many other DJs dont need it,
dont
> > >prefer it, and whose performance would be limited by said technology.
> > >
> > > > as for the detrimental trade on vinyl. well, it's heavy, wears out,
>and
> > >is
> > >hard
> > > > to distribute. digital files can be endlessly copied and emailed
all
> > >over
> > >the
> > > > place, placed on sites. it allows more people to have access to
more
> > >music. what
> > > > you do on the turntables should be determined by your skill level
and
> > > > inventiveness, not by the vinyl you can afford or have access to.
> > > > instead of letting record companies, distributors, and record
stores
> > >determine
> > > > what tracks you have access to you can play tracks by anybody that
>cares
> > >to post
> > > > them.
> > >
> > >your words are very interesting. so what if vinyl is heavy, wears out
>and
> > >is hard to distribute? all of those things are unique to the DJ trade
>and
> > >the art form. thomas brinkmann is able to utilize a unique
technological
> > >tool, one final scratch can't even approach and that relies on vinyl
and
> > >not
> > >mp3.
> > >
> > >that not just anyone can have any track is central to my argument.
dont
> > >think i'm preaching vinyl elitism - but if everyone had access to any
and
> > >every track, would they create something unique, special, or anything
but
> > >homogenized? here's an analogy - if everyone had the exact same make,
> > >model
> > >and color Porsche, would it still be special??
> > >
> > >more people with more access is giddy hat-tip to liberalist
>egalitarianism.
> > >part of the fun of DJing, to me, is digging through crates in used
shops,
> > >looking on the internet for out of print tracks, trading them with my
> > >friends, cleaning them up once in a while and chatting with people all
>over
> > >the world when buying or selling vinyl.
> > >
> > >"what you do on the turntables should be determined by your skill
level
>and
> > >inventiveness, not by the vinyl you can afford or have access to"
> > >
> > >contradiction! first you say that everyone will have access to more
>music,
> > >then you assert that 'inventiveness' will occur? my retail experience
> > >shows
> > >me first that as soon as a new mix CD comes out kids are lining up to
buy
> > >the tracks on that mix. and often they don't just want the tracks -
they
> > >want to play them in the SAME order. second, since anyone can own and
>play
> > >anything, what will stop the 'top' DJs from playing all the songs a
crowd
> > >wants to hear? easy access is exactly why mp3 DJs devalue our beloved
> > >music!
> > >
> > >also, your statement seems focused solely on 'smooth mix' djs like
>hawtin,
> > >and i daresay, many of the big room trance djs. what about those who
>dont
> > >blend for hours? are you asserting that that m!lls is not inventive?
rob
> > >swift? cut chemist & dj shadow? et al?
> > >
> > >i agree that people with too much money own a lot of good tracks.
> > >
> > >but making tracks FREE to people will make that problem much, much
worse.
> > >
> > >while i support unknown artists sharing their work, universally
accepting
> > >this style of DJing will most certainly mire music production and
DJing
>in
> > >a
> > >rut of banality.
> > >
> > >it's clear that you're behind this technology as some sort of
>'bar-raising'
> > >effort that would urge DJs to be more creative. in fact, like so much
> > >globalization and imagineering, it's only going to homogenize an
already
> > >dilute musical form.
> > >
> > >i can live with being a vinyl junkie but i'll never be an mp3 junkie.
> > >
> > >in the spirit of healthy debate,
> > >
> > >vince
> > >
> > > > Subject: Re: [313] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] everywhere
> > > >
> > > > Personally, I just can't get into Final Scratch and digital
editing.
> > >There
> > > > are hundreds DJs out there who are equipped with the physical
hardware
> > >to
> > > > (nearly) do this kind of audio montage live. They're called
> > >turntablists.
> > > > And in techno, a few names shouldn't be too far out of mind -
Mills,
> > >Young,
> > > > Parker, Bone to name a few key Detroiters.
> > > >
> > > > Not to mention the detrimental effect use of digital files may have
on
> > >the
> > > > trade of vinyl discs...
> > > >
> > > > Vince Woolums
> > > > AOL IM: vincewoolums
> > > > http://bnsrecords.gemm.com
> > > > http://www.recordcollectorinc.com
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: Glyph1001
> > > > To: <313@hyperreal.org>
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2001 5:28 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: [313] hawtin hawtin everywhere
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Mixed reviews is the consensus. I personally thought musically,
the
> > >cd
> > > > > was pretty cool and funky. I've said before that it sounded
Studio
> > > > > One-ish. This series is all about the gear and techniques that
goes
> > >into
> > > > > the production of these mixes, not necessarily the music itself,
> > > > > although some people expected way too much from R1chie musically,
> > >hence
> > > > > the mixed reviews.
> > > > >
> > > > > g.
> > > > >
> > > > > Rusty Blasco wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > So what's the consensus floating around thus far concerning the
>new
> > > > > > R!chie H!wtin joint? I personally haven't heard it yet and am
> > >waiting
> > > > > > for my first paycheck in months (fingers crossed it doesn't get
>held
> > > > > > up somewhere in the bureaucratic process); a positive public
>opinion
> > > > > > will increase the excitement I have towards my not-too-distant
> > > > > > purchase. Has he mellowed out or become any housier (as a
>colleague
> > > > > > informed me)? Please respond to me personally.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Rusty
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
