amon tobin samples
milo
i'm a big fan of amon tobin, especially his jazzy stuff. i love the
stylish minimalist edgy jazz samples that he throws in. i was
wondering if anyone knew what jazz artists are behind the original
recordings of these samples.
for example, who played the quirky vibraphone melody on track 1 of the
album permutation?
thanks
milo
Krishna Rayaprolu
took samples from "early jazz" although he couldn't comment on the
details.
Krishna
delt...@yahoo.co.uk (milo) wrote in message news:<429ee6fb.0405...@posting.google.com>...
nine...@grandecom.net
stealing will be created?
I don't know who amon tobin is, nor do I care to if 'sampling' the work of
others is a significant part of his work. As far as I'm concerned he's doing
the same thing I fail students for--stealing material he didn't create and
presenting it as his. It isn't a bunch of young people having fun with
technology--it's plagiarism.
kyrre laastad
<nine...@grandecom.net> skrev i melding
news:109f1bt...@corp.supernews.com...
so when a band plays a cover of a tune and does not introduce the tune at
all it is the same? i have loads of keith jarrett trio live cds, and i can't
remember him introducing a single tune. would that make him a thief?
regards,
-kyrre.
Krishna Rayaprolu
not, I think it is inappropriate to call him a "thief".
As far as creativity goes, his music sounds absolutely original and
doesn't sound even remotely like Jazz.
Krishna
<nine...@grandecom.net> wrote in message news:<109f1bt...@corp.supernews.com>...
Ryan Conlon
You should listen to Amon Tobin. He uses jazz samples creatively and
with a very personal touch. There is currently an entire generation
of musicians who use samples as the basis for their art. It is a
shame that you have not heard any of this and you should probably try
to educate yourself about it. It is a very legimate form of artistic
creation.
I know that on the track Stoney Street, Amon Tobin uses cuts from
Sonny Rollins at the Village Vanguard. A sample from Wilbur Ware's
solo on Softly is used as the bass line. It's a really groovin' solo
on the original, and it sounds great in this more danceable context.
-- Ryan
nine...@grandecom.net
so when a band plays a cover of a tune and does not introduce the tune at
> all it is the same? i have loads of keith jarrett trio live cds, and i
can't
> remember him introducing a single tune. would that make him a thief?
>
> regards,
> -kyrre.
No. It isn't the same at all. If they have to play the music, then they had
to practice and deal with what the musician had to go through to make the
music in the first place. Cut and paste sampling removes that part of the
process. You don't have to have good time, or a good sound, or any other
good musical quality. Just electronically lift the previous work (which some
other musician probably sweat bullets over) and plop it onto your music.
That's my objection. I don't have any problem with anyone playing Charlie
Parker's music (or any other music). In fact, I think it would be a good
thing if people would learn the music of other musicians and play it before
they start composing.
nine...@grandecom.net
I know that on the track Stoney Street, Amon Tobin uses cuts from
> Sonny Rollins at the Village Vanguard. A sample from Wilbur Ware's
> solo on Softly is used as the bass line. It's a really groovin' solo
> on the original, and it sounds great in this more danceable context.
So he stole Wilbur Ware's work. He didn't learn to play the bass line, did
he? He just appropriated the recording. I wonder if Wilbur gets any money?
I don't care how creative he is. I have a problem with the process. I don't
think a sampler has to work to play like I had to to play Herbie's riff on
Cantaloupe Island (another sampled groove).
nine...@grandecom.net
i have loads of keith jarrett trio live cds, and i can't
> remember him introducing a single tune.
I would bet those CDs credit the song in question and that royalties were
paid to the composer.
nine...@grandecom.net
Anthropology vs. someone simply using another musician's recording of it is
the subject of any discussion, debate, or whatever. There is a vast
difference in the level of skill involved in learning any of Parker's more
complicated melodies vs. copying a preexisting recording. This is a jazz
newsgroup? I'm in the twilight zone.
kyrre laastad
<nine...@grandecom.net> skrev i melding
news:109h17g...@corp.supernews.com...
>
> so when a band plays a cover of a tune and does not introduce the tune at
> > all it is the same? i have loads of keith jarrett trio live cds, and i
> can't
> > remember him introducing a single tune. would that make him a thief?
> >
> > regards,
> > -kyrre.
>
> No. It isn't the same at all. If they have to play the music, then they
had
> to practice and deal with what the musician had to go through to make the
> music in the first place. Cut and paste sampling removes that part of the
> process.
with all due respect, that is not true. the process of timestretching a
sample to make it fit in to another piece of music is very difficult and is
something one needs to really work on to make it work. remember, most jazz
aren't strictly on time.
>You don't have to have good time, or a good sound, or any other
> good musical quality.
that is also not true. sound manipulation and sound quality is the essence
of sampling
> Just electronically lift the previous work (which some
> other musician probably sweat bullets over) and plop it onto your music.
that is very important to remember. that the music is the work of the
composer who put all the parts together. you probably haven't heard more
original samplebased artists, but check out the album rounds by four tet. it
relies heavily on sampled phrases, but he has manipulated them a lot and put
them together in a very unique way. you should give it a chance. the music
is very unique and also improvisation based.
> That's my objection. I don't have any problem with anyone playing Charlie
> Parker's music (or any other music). In fact, I think it would be a good
> thing if people would learn the music of other musicians and play it
before
> they start composing.
i sort of agree on that.
regards,
-kyrre.
kyrre laastad
<nine...@grandecom.net> skrev i melding
news:109h1fn...@corp.supernews.com...
yeah, but they haven't released every concert he has done.
regards,
-kyrre.
nine...@grandecom.net
>
> with all due respect, that is not true. the process of timestretching a
> sample to make it fit in to another piece of music is very difficult and
is
> something one needs to really work on to make it work. remember, most jazz
> aren't strictly on time.
This is amazing. What scales, chords, etudes, etc., did Mr. Tobin (or others
like him) have to study to get their 'music' together? What instrument does
he play? Since when do DJs qualify as musicians?
> >You don't have to have good time, or a good sound, or any other
> > good musical quality.
>
> that is also not true. sound manipulation and sound quality is the essence
> of sampling
So they have to have ears. So do recording engineers. I appreciate what a
good recording engineer can do, but I wouldn't call him a musician. Nor do I
consider a sound man a musician, but I've heard plenty of concerts where the
sound man did hurt the proceedings. However, that didn't interfere with me
knowing who the musician was, and how good the musician was.
> that is very important to remember. that the music is the work of the
> composer who put all the parts together. you probably haven't heard more
> original samplebased artists, but check out the album rounds by four tet.
it
> relies heavily on sampled phrases, but he has manipulated them a lot and
put
> them together in a very unique way. you should give it a chance. the music
> is very unique and also improvisation based.
Actually, I had a musician (great sax player) do a demonstration of various
hip hop things he digs for my class. Some of the music was interesting.
I don't have problem with the music itself, contrary to what you may think.
I have a problem with the process.
Using this process it is possible for someone with poor musicial skills (and
I know a frustrated student musician who has turned to creating tracks--it's
probably just as well. He was tanking as a jazz major.) to become an artist
of some kind. It's hard for me to muster up the kind of respect for these
people that I have for Glenn Gould or Oscar Peterson. So I'm narrow minded
about it.
nine...@grandecom.net
> yeah, but they haven't released every concert he has done.
>
> regards,
> -kyrre.
And what's the point here? Jarrett has more than paid his dues as a pianist.
Does playing Bach or bebop make him invalid? A 'cover band'? Or is it simply
the established tradition of music making? That to be really good you must
measure yourself against greatness, which is exactly what sampling allows
you to bypass. You don't need to measure yourself against Bach by learning
to play it. You can just copy someone else's version and tweak it (which is
the skill we are talking about--computerized manipulation. I admit it's a
craft, but I don't buy that it's music).
Krishna Rayaprolu
moral issue or if you are questioning the creativity in it or if you
just have a problem with the fact that sampling artists are not
working hard enough to create the elements of their music. But the
last issue is the more interesting one to debate. That is, if a
sampling artist is not having to spend as much efforts to get a
snippet of bass solo in his music, does that make his art any less
interesting?
<nine...@grandecom.net> wrote in message news:<109h1cr...@corp.supernews.com>...
nine...@grandecom.net
I'm not sure if the process itself is art.
I do have a moral issue with it.
I'm not questioning the creativity as much as whether it is music, since it
does not require a musical instrument (including the singing voice) to
exist.
I do question the KIND of work involved. I know they probably spend hours on
it.
I suspect it is easier than learning Bach's music, or Bird's.
"Krishna Rayaprolu" <krishna_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e9b5eb9d.04050...@posting.google.com...
Krishna Rayaprolu
art/music:
In one sense, this is a difficult question - since sampling is a new
thing, there is no reference point in our known styles of music to
compare it with, and hence doesn't fit with any definition of music
that we might have formed from the styles we are familiar with (like
in your case, your notion of music seems to require some sort of a
musical instrument, some skill involved in mastering that instrument
and so on).
Personally, my own concept of music is based on what it does to me
rather than the process behind the creation of that music. When I
first heard Amon Tobin's -Permutation- it really blew me with no less
intensity than any Coltrane or Dolphy or Shorter's record ever did
(although in a different way ofcourse). No kidding. I really
recommend this cd!
Krishna
<nine...@grandecom.net> wrote in message news:<109iqds...@corp.supernews.com>...
milo
thanks for the response!
jazz sampling is obviuosly a contentious issue.
i don't think there's much wrong with amon tobin sampling old time
jazz, because he uses it to create a very original groove. i like to
make electronic music, and jazz is an influence. i sample a bit of
jazz beats and toots ,and fiddle around with them. also i like to
learn how to play jazz riff on my synth, so i can understand what
notes and chords add a particular flavour. then maybe experiment with
these notes in different ways, different rhythms, maybe throw in a
pitch bend, syncopate with percussion. actually i have to say this way
is easier than fiddling around with samples, which requires a lot of
work.
though the original samples have a lot more atmosphere to them, my
music sounds like computer game music.
so in a way, using samples requires more skill than composing new
tunes, i think. or at least it requires a different skill, and i like
the freshness of the skill.
however, i don't like the attitude of " sample something already done,
already processed, then fiddle around with it, proccess it loads, then
program it into a strict sequence." some people have a fear of doing
music right here, right now, for real, which is when spontaniety and
minor miracles happen.
so its complicated.
kyrre laastad
<nine...@grandecom.net> skrev i melding
news:109i703...@corp.supernews.com...
> This is amazing. What scales, chords, etudes, etc., did Mr. Tobin (or
others
> like him) have to study to get their 'music' together? What instrument
does
> he play? Since when do DJs qualify as musicians?
take a band like the british autechre
kyrre laastad
<nine...@grandecom.net> skrev i melding
news:109i703...@corp.supernews.com...
> This is amazing. What scales, chords, etudes, etc., did Mr. Tobin (or
others
> like him) have to study to get their 'music' together? What instrument
does
> he play? Since when do DJs qualify as musicians?
to play records in it self isn't being a musician, but to create new music
out of already recorded sounds is being a musician and a composer. now,
don't get me wrong, i don't think much of some hip hop producer putting a
guitar theme from an old song on top of some beat he made in 30 seconds.
that's not being creative. but when guys like four tet, or autechre or just
about any other warp artists manipulate sounds into something new it is a
highly creative and musical process. i would not hesitate to call any of
those guys musicians. for example, matmos made a record entirely made out of
sounds sampled from plastical surgery (except for one song, which was
created from the sound of a rat cage being bowed). i'd definately call that
being musicians and composers.
lot's of modern composers like stockhausen, xenakis etc. made music from
manipulating recorded sounds, like for instance stockhausen's "gesang der
junglige" which put's up the singing voices of young boys against
electronically produced sounds. i'd call this very creative, and also very
musical.
> > that is also not true. sound manipulation and sound quality is the
essence
> > of sampling
> So they have to have ears. So do recording engineers. I appreciate what a
> good recording engineer can do, but I wouldn't call him a musician.
this is irelevant.
> Nor do I
> consider a sound man a musician, but I've heard plenty of concerts where
the
> sound man did hurt the proceedings. However, that didn't interfere with me
> knowing who the musician was, and how good the musician was.
good for you.
> Actually, I had a musician (great sax player) do a demonstration of
various
> hip hop things he digs for my class. Some of the music was interesting.
> I don't have problem with the music itself, contrary to what you may
think.
> I have a problem with the process.
i don't. i have a problem with people sampling one repetitive phrase and
playing it over and over without being creative. i don't have the slightest
problem with creative composers putting together sound from various sources
to create new music. not at all.
> Using this process it is possible for someone with poor musicial skills
yeah, but a person with poor musical skills can play the guitar, the piano
or whatever as well. he can't do it good, but neither can an electronic
artist who's not musical.
> (and
> I know a frustrated student musician who has turned to creating
tracks--it's
> probably just as well. He was tanking as a jazz major.) to become an
artist
> of some kind. It's hard for me to muster up the kind of respect for these
> people that I have for Glenn Gould or Oscar Peterson. So I'm narrow minded
> about it.
i have no problems with respecting and loving the music of both glenn gould
and autechre. because they're all great musicians and artists.
regards,
-kyrre.
n.p: ayler et al - new york eye and ear control
void
<nine...@grandecom.net> wrote:
> And how does supporting a thief help insure that more of the music he's
> stealing will be created?
>
> I don't know who amon tobin is,
Then shut up about his music.
--
Ben
"An art scene of delight
I created this to be ..." -- Sun Ra
sum1
> On Tue, 4 May 2004 06:58:56 -0500, <nine...@grandecom.net>
> <nine...@grandecom.net> wrote:
> > And how does supporting a thief help insure that more of the music he's
> > stealing will be created?
> >
> > I don't know who amon tobin is,
>
> Then shut up about his music.
Gee, where have you been? Could have used you in countless run-ins
with the smooth-bashers, the ones who never actually listen to
Contemporary Jazz but think they know all there is to know about it.
nine...@grandecom.net
> > I don't know who amon tobin is,
>
> Then shut up about his music.
I just visited his web site http://www.amontobin.com/
I listened to a number of the 11 cuts he wants me to hear.
I also went to his older website. Very sci-fi graphics, sounds, etc.
"None of my pictures end up looking like me anyway."
I am glad he has a website where I could hear his music. That way I could be
assured that my problems with his music (and my expectation of what I would
be hearing) were accurate, without having to support his enterprises.
I can't tell if I'm hearing anything that wasn't created using computers,
synthesizers, etc. He does appear to be serious about what he is doing. I
don't buy his notion that sampling is the equivalent of a composer studying
orchestration, a vocalist vocalizing or a clarinet player learning etudes.
I'm also not convinced he's exploring any territory that electronic
composers like Milton Babbitt haven't already explored. (I don't buy Milton
Babbitt's stuff either--I have checked it out of the library and given it a
listen. I was not impressed or amused by either Babbitt or Tobin.)
Furthermore, I've never been sold on the idea that new is good by virtue of
being new. I think it was Hindemith who said nothing is more tiresome than
the rage to be modern.
I return to my original point. Who Mr. Tobin is (or how his music sounds)
does not have any bearing on my objection to the way these recordings are
created, and it never did. Therefore, the idea that I can't comment on the
soundness of an idea without considering an example of the idea in practice
is specious. I reject the premise. The example are irrelevant.
I'd rather hear acoustic music. It's much more honest. You can't hide behind
anything. You want a good sound, you have to make it.
So for starters, amplification creates a problem. The sound I hear in the
audience isn't the sound of the musician in question.
Now we add to that recording and the possibility of tweaking the product.
An out of tune singer need not sound so.
But wait, why bother singing? Or learning an instrument?
We can simply create music using computers. Just punch a button and the most
perfect arpeggios you ever heard will come out while you simply hold a note.
How cool is that?
But wait, there's more. We'll start plopping things off our CDs on the
recordings we are creating. Now we have successfully bypassed (not overcome)
any and all obstacles to being the next Stravinsky. We don't have to
practice, just play with knobs.
I'm still listening to Mr. Tobin via his web site. I'm still waiting for him
to do something that makes me think his music was worth this much
correspondence.
My brother just put on Thad Jones jamming with Count Basie. AH. That's more
like it.
I just wish I could hear it in person instead of through a speaker.
sum1
I'm surprised a Luddite keeps a stereo in his house. Only live music*
is "real" music, you know.
-----------
*on acoustic instruments, of course
nine...@grandecom.net
> is "real" music, you know.
It was, regrettably, a concession I had to make. I wanted to study great
jazz music, and there was not a lot of it where I was.
And yes, it is true. CDs are not music at all. They are pieces of plastic
which document musical events. In some cases, musical events which did not
occur at the same time.
sum1
You ought to give up your computer and go back to paper and pen.
JC Martin
news:109rc6h...@corp.supernews.com...
I personally think that the artificiality of the studio environment mimics
the same processes that take place in real life. Some of the medicine you
may take in fact involves an artificial process. Does that mean it has no
usefulness?
-JC
JC Martin
news:109h1oa...@corp.supernews.com...
> I'm amazed that the difference in someone learning to play the head to
> Anthropology vs. someone simply using another musician's recording of it
is
> the subject of any discussion, debate, or whatever. There is a vast
> difference in the level of skill involved in learning any of Parker's more
> complicated melodies vs. copying a preexisting recording.
Certainly. But there's a difference between artistry (how one organizes and
arranges sound into a creative whole) and skill (or technique) on one's
instrument. This is something that escapes another poster, Nick. A great
artist or innovator isn't necessarily the most skilled, since skill revolves
repetition of old ideas. New ideas are born out people who have to think
outside the box since they may have no interest in acquiring the technique
necessary to master a field.
-JC
nine...@grandecom.net
> I personally think that the artificiality of the studio environment mimics
> the same processes that take place in real life. Some of the medicine you
> may take in fact involves an artificial process. Does that mean it has no
> usefulness?
>
> -JC
I don't deny its usefulness at all. I used recordings to learn how to play.
I love my Sarah Vaughan and Dexter Gordon records. I give every one of them
away right now and not replace them for a chance to hear either one of them
live again. Why? Because however good their recordings sound, in person
their sound has a quality that defies recording. I don't know exactly why
that is, but I know it is so.
nine...@grandecom.net
> artist or innovator isn't necessarily the most skilled, since skill
revolves
> repetition of old ideas. New ideas are born out people who have to think
> outside the box since they may have no interest in acquiring the technique
> necessary to master a field.
Cool. More substantial ideas instead of drivel. Thank you.
There is much in what you say here.
However, it is easy to find major innovators who began by mastering the
skills of those they admired. Raphael comes to mind. He copied his teacher
(Perugino, I think) and Leonardo and Michelangelo. You can clearly see where
he did so. But he then integrated it into his own vision. That was the
innovation.
The same can be said of Bird. He copied Lester Young, Coleman Hawkins, Art
Tatum and Louis Armstrong (among others). And you can hear things he got
from all of them.
In both the cases above the innovation happened after the people concerned
had mastered the ideas of others. Raphael didn't simply 'photocopy' (which
was impossible anyway). He had to learn technique to draw like Leonardo or
Michelangelo. To this day, copying their drawings will teach you to draw.
Same with copying the solos of the musicians above. It will teach you to
play. The Body and Soul solo by Coleman Hawkins is not easy to learn or
play. I learned plenty from studying and performing that solo.
There are a few cases of people where the ability one would expect wasn't
present beforehand. Berlioz did not play any instrument at what was
considered a professional level in his day, yet he changed orchestration.
However, he studied scores like crazy and went to orchestra rehearsals and
performances constantly. He wrote music for others to play, so that does put
him in a different category. He never claimed to be a performer, as far as I
know.
Some people think Monk would qualify as a 'limited' player who came up with
new ideas because he couldn't play like Bird or Tatum. I think this is very
strange thinking. Monk studied at Julliard, studied with Mary Lou Williams
and gigged with Coleman Hawkins (and sounds like your average young
journeyman pianist). He himself said, "I played a gang of scales just like
everybody else." How often do you hear him miss?
If a person has no interest in the skills required to participate in a
field, then they aren't in that game, are they?
If I don't care to deal with the challenge in the music of Bessie Smith,
Bird, Pops or Trane (etc., we all know who the standard bearers are), is it
correct or fair to call myself a jazz musician?
nine...@grandecom.net
> I personally think that the artificiality of the studio environment mimics
> the same processes that take place in real life. Some of the medicine you
> may take in fact involves an artificial process. Does that mean it has no
> usefulness?
How much fun is listening to white noise? As soon as you plug in, white
noise is part of the equation, no matter how good your equipment is.
Krishna Rayaprolu
able to place less demands on the technique without compromising on
its freedom, it would actually foster more creativity. Electronic
music seems to be doing just that. While other styles of music create
their sounds from scratch, electronic musicians seem to work with
higher level sound structures like samples, loops etc. Its like
cooking with tofu instead of soy beans. While soy beans have their
place, we would have fewer interesting dishes if everyone is required
to cook only from raw ingredients.
Krishna
"JC Martin" <jcma...@sonic.net> wrote in message news:<KNqnc.10450$Fo4.1...@typhoon.sonic.net>...