jmstone

[quote name='thepurpleblob' post='541020' date='Jul 15 2009, 09:54 AM']Being up on stage playing music is inescapably about look and image. It's nearly as important as the music. My band consists of four old, fat, baldy blokes - it's a bit of an odd image but it's still an image. Most pro musicians I know care a great deal about their appearance as it can make the difference between getting the gig or not. EDIT: Hang on a minute... who'se the dude in the carefully crafted white shirt and loose tie. You go down the pub like that do you [/quote] Haha.. yes! Good spot! That was attempt number 1 at band image.. Not sure the singer liked the fact I didn't bother to bring cufflinks for the shirt! but I think it was quite funny! See [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9g99Lej6SE"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9g99Lej6SE[/url] and [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkwG70xj7QY"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkwG70xj7QY[/url] Attempt number 2 was a DJ - see [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrzMYCTnFa0"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrzMYCTnFa0[/url] Attempt number 3 was jeans and a t-shirt (i.e. what I normally wear). Guess which one I felt most comfortable with, but was least popular? I'm not averse to making an effort to go on stage, although I find that kind of thing intensely annoying in my everyday life (some deep character flaw clearly), but I'm at a bit of a loss for what to go for... Any ideas would be gratefully received! James

The singer in the band I'm in is really keen on band image, getting us all along for photoshoots, and having some kind of consistent "look" from the band. In fact, after our last gig I got some stick for wearing jeans (which apparently she really hates). I have always really hated looking smart, and I seem to have got stuck in an indie/grunge time-warp so maybe she has a point, but I do find it all intensely irritating.. I would rather just play music and forget about all this photography/video/costume kind of crap. So, what do people here think? Is band image that important (you have to bear in mind that although we are gigging, none of us is particularly fantastic musically in my opinion).. Do I need to bite the bullet and go out and get that red shirt and jacket (or whatever ridiculous get-up is planned), or is it OK to just look scruffy? - at least until we get that record deal ( i.e. never !!! ) James

[quote name='Archetype' post='511881' date='Jun 12 2009, 10:10 AM']Will give the tracks a listen. I would keep the bass going through the V-Amp, that way signal levels are going to be converted properly. Although you might like the sound of the bass straight into the sound card. Also in terms of it missing that low end. have you listened to it on more than just computer speakers (although i don't know your setup)?[/quote] I mixed/mastered on headphones (ATH-M40) which have a pretty good low end, and I am happy with the bass now following EQ and compression of the bass track plus mastering of the song (in fact it may be slightly overdone), but the initial bass signal seemed very weak... I think someone had mentioned that about using a guitar v-amp with a bass guitar before. I am wondering if a bass V-amp might be a worthwhile investment.. I quite like the fact it can be used as a headphone amplifier.. or maybe I should just go for a Sansamp? James

So yesterday morning, instead of fighting the tube in to work I decided to record a quick pop/punk song.. which rapidly took up the whole morning (have to catch up today)! Guitar (Aria TA50) recorded thru a V-amp2 (guitar).. Warwick Streamer LX recorded thru same thing (seemed to really badly cut the low end so lots of post-compression and EQ used). Vocals thru a Samson C01 and a Behringer Minimic 800 into the line of a SBLive. All recorded using Ardour2. There are 2 versions of it here.. "your clothes are red" is the rough mix and "red" is the mixed/mastered (using jamin) version. Comments on mixing, mastering, songwriting all gratefully accepted! [url="http://drop.io/your_clothes_are_red"]http://drop.io/your_clothes_are_red[/url] Oh - also is it OK to record the bass direct to the soundcard without a DI box? I thought no - hence using the V-amp as a DI for the bass, but I am not very happy with the solution. James

Just listening to some Suzanne Vega stuff as my brother mentioned she has some great basslines on 99.9F, I came across this youtube vid: [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdoG3NkMI1I"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdoG3NkMI1I[/url] Now, clearly the bassist is great, but to me the timing sounds really off in places - mainly in the riff between verses. Or is it just me? James

[quote name='slaphappygarry' post='481013' date='May 6 2009, 02:11 PM']Good stuff, glad you got it! All the very best with it James and co. G[/quote] Yep.. thanks Garry. I think you did a fantastic job! James

Our first studio track (Don't Call Her Baby). Recorded at the London Music School in Hackney, and brilliantly mixed/mastered by Basschat's very own Slaphappygarry! This is also going to be used in our first low budget music video (currently being edited as we speak). Would be very interested to get some feedback on this track. Admittedly my bass playing is far from brilliant (so try to overlook that bit if you can!). More practice with a metronome needed... The bass is a Warwick Streamer (bought from Gaf here) and DI'd straight to the board. The track is on our myspace page: [url="http://myspace.com/kittencakeband"]http://myspace.com/kittencakeband[/url] or you can download the high quality mp3 here: [url="http://drop.io/dont_call_her_baby"]http://drop.io/dont_call_her_baby[/url] password kc09 James

[quote name='Crazykiwi' post='475579' date='Apr 29 2009, 11:05 PM']He's not actually that fat any more for those who haven't seen him in the last couple of years. He's shed a shitload of weight and looks quite trim now.[/quote] Yeh, but why let the facts get in the way of a brilliant joke!? (I was almost rolling on the floor in hysterics) But no, I think he is talking rubbish.

[quote name='cheddatom' post='474942' date='Apr 29 2009, 12:01 PM']You could export it from Pro Tools and do it yourself, or upload it and i'll do it for free.[/quote] Wow.. that's an amazing offer! Do you have Pro Tools, or would you need the exported files? James

Well, we got our first track recorded, but now it needs mixing... It is currently in protools format. I might have attempted to mix it myself but for the fact I don't have protools... Does anyone have any recommendations for someone who could mix this to a reasonable standard (might require a bit of quantising on the drums as well as the usual compression etc..)? James

Pretty low-quality vid I'm afraid but maybe gives an idea... [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrzMYCTnFa0"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrzMYCTnFa0[/url] This was an absolutely fantastic gig though - we had been recording all day, being followed around by a film crew, who are going to try to put together a low-budget video for the track we recorded.. took some interesting footage in the cemetery, then followed by a really enjoyable set - last band pulled out so we ended up being "headliners"... Even more surreal was after we finished playing we noticed Prince William and Harry in the crowd - allegedly come to see a "friend's band"!! [url="http://uk.popsugar.com/3082853"]http://uk.popsugar.com/3082853[/url]

Can't listen to it as your myspace page has too much stuff on it for my ageing computer...

[quote name='WILD FROG SHOT' post='469627' date='Apr 22 2009, 02:32 PM']Yeah Clarky is totally right. Band chemistry almost gives you a sixth sense.[/quote] +1 Its much more important to have fun with people you get on with.. I really agree about starting your own band too - going to auditions with unsuitable bands is just so horrible! Just scour the pages for drummers and guitarists who are also looking for bands. Gumtree and Joinmyband.co.uk worked pretty well for me. James

[quote name='ashevans09' post='469195' date='Apr 22 2009, 12:19 AM']In a word, no. As has been said before good music hasn't died, it's just lower prices and the internet have made mediocre music more accessible. Search among the rubble.[/quote] .. and of course, the most mediocre is the most accessible of all! (as always)

[quote name='Prosebass' post='467312' date='Apr 20 2009, 11:18 AM']Why not ? if you are in a high energy punk / thrash band , the mosh pit is full and everyone is frantic then go for it if you think it fits the performance. Why is it crass and setting a bad example ? its your gear to do as you please with. May not be very fitting with an MOR / AOR or Jazz set but then everyone will be sat down at those gigs (audience will be too old to stand for any amount of time) so not very apt in that instance. People attach themselves too much to possessions and in a way smashing things up makes a positive statement that these things are transient and unimportant in the greater scheme of things.[/quote] IMO, the reason it's crass is it almost always looks unintentionally hilarious (any of the times I have seen it), and really something of the past. The comment about audiences being too old to stand up is a bit off too - after all, it was that generation that started the smashing of guitars in the first place! James

Only would be worth it if it was a joke band like Spinal Tap - and only then if the bass player managed to not smash the bass up at all but only injure him/herself (note I am not volunteering for this job)!! It reminds me of when I saw Blur playing in 1992 (rollercoaster tour) - up to that time I thought they were quite good, but Damon Albarn was a complete idiot in that show - the most hilarious part being when he tried to push a stack of cabs over, and a roadie came in from stage right and pushed the cabs back in the opposite direction - pure comedy genius! edit: Here is a hilarious guitarist-thinking-of-smashing-her-guitar-then-deciding-not-to video from my friend's band.... [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XgDSll7A3M"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XgDSll7A3M[/url] James

Yep. It's really nice (but you already knew that!) James

[quote name='Skybone' post='464899' date='Apr 17 2009, 12:27 PM']Believe me, I've tried all that, and even then, I kept getting asked for free downloads. You try to explain that you're doing this off your own back, at no profit, but the question keeps coming back "why can't I download this for free?".[/quote] Well, maybe this is a difficult transition period, but I think people will get more used to paying for downloads as time goes on. One interesting model I heard of, which apparently worked for one band, was making all their tracks free downloads at low bitrate mp3 quality, but to get the "proper" versions (either high bitrate mp3, maybe flac or even CD), people had to pay... It is easy to justify - bandwidth isn't free, the band needs to make money somehow.. IIRC I think bands used to get paid 50p per CD sale.. You can get close to that now per single mp3 download.. so with the right sound, and the right advertising, it should be easier for smallish bands to make money than it used to be. [quote]Very true, but this is also effecting the underground music scene too, where you can get into a gig for £5.00 and see 3, 4 or more bands. Last show I played, there were 10 bands playing an all dayer, it cost £6.00 on the door. Do the maths, £6.00 to see 10 bands? Sounds like a bargain to me. There were also about 10 or 15 people there who'd travelled over from mainland Europe to see some of the bands, there were at least 20 people who'd travelled up from the south of England to Yorkshire for the show, excluding the bands who'd done the same journey.[/quote] I'm sorry to hear that internationally famous bands are only getting to play for low door takings, in multi-band shows.. I thought that was only the "toilet circuit".. Still, it is up to the individual band to decide if they want to play those kinds of gigs. There is always the possibility of putting on your own shows/tour, and if the fans want to see you enough, they will pay whatever you decide to charge. James

[quote name='Geoff' post='464813' date='Apr 17 2009, 11:13 AM']Agreed on that point. People seem to be missing out on everything else that goes along with the music as well, such as artwork and the whole package you'd get with a cd/vinyl/tape. I love hunting for cd's that are hard to find and I like having something tangible sat there at home. I was searching through my parents record collection recently and was blown away by some of the ways the album was presented in its sleeve.[/quote] Also true.. Another reason why vinyl has still not died out - There is definitely a place for collectible 7 inches/eps/LPs for good bands! Not so sure that CDs are that great (particularly not when those little tabs in the middle of the CD box which are supposed to hold the CD in place fall off). James

[quote name='Skybone' post='464807' date='Apr 17 2009, 11:03 AM']What's more worrying from my point of view, is the increasing number of people who get their music from free downloads off blogs/wherever. Not only is it killing off the record shops, but it's stopping the smaller, independant labels function, because they can't afford to sign up and release stuff from new bands. Anyone see the report on the BBC where they looked at independant record shops? There was something like 400 shops in the UK that went out of business in a year.[/quote] Don't know if you have any objective proof that this is the reason for this happening? I reckon the independent record shops were more likely put out of business by amazon (and online retailing) than by mp3s and filesharing.. Personally I am spending more on music now than ever before - mainly driven by hearing new stuff on podcasts, internet radio, recommendations on emusic etc. To be bothered to rip a song out of a podcast is about as much of a threat to the music industry as taping top of the pops onto a cassette IMHO. [quote]If you are a musician, and you support free downloads, take a long, hard, objective look at what you're doing. Ask yourself if you want to sign that elusive record deal, or play as many gigs as you can, or just simply make a few quid so that you can carry on doing something that you love doing.[/quote] I think you also need to take a look at ways of making money out of the massive audience the internet affords. James

I read somewhere that some older guitars need you to hold the neck into the new position before adjusting the rod, whereas more modern guitars you can just tweak the rod, and the neck follows. Not sure if this is true or not.. James

[quote name='4000' post='464640' date='Apr 17 2009, 07:18 AM']You see this is all just horses for courses, because although I'm not a big fan at all I much prefer any of the first 3 current bands you mention to Keane (who are possibly one of my least-favourite bands of all time). As for Kasabian, to me they just sound like they once heard 30 seconds of Space Ritual and have tried their best to replicate it without ever having heard it again.[/quote] Hahaha! +1 [quote]Ultimately I think anyone who thinks their choice of "decent band" is the only option is somewhat missing the point. Good and bad bands are pointless divisions as everyone has a different opinion; there are only bands you like and bands you don't, and the reasons you like them will be many and varied and influenced by all sorts of nebulous factors.[/quote] I agree.. In my opinion, if Kasabian is the best current band someone can find, I would think they are not looking hard enough (or they have very different tastes to me). Bands haven't got better or worse per say, just different.. but it's so personal. A band I like will probably be hated by the vast majority of the population.. and vice versa. I find it hard to believe there aren't bands out there that would satisfy any taste, but not having the same tastes, it makes it impossible to suggest any.. New bands clearly aren't still playing the same music of the 60s, 70s, 80s or 90s (unless they are generic crap) - if they did the scene wouldn't be progressing.. I think the following couple of places are great to hear what's happening out there (but won't appeal to all): [url="http://www.dandelionradio.com/"]http://www.dandelionradio.com/[/url] [url="http://www.digitalpodcast.com/browse-alternative_music-podcast-43-1.html"]http://www.digitalpodcast.com/browse-alter...dcast-43-1.html[/url] For some retro sounds - not usually my cup of tea - this band is quite nice: [url="http://www.myspace.com/tameimpala"]http://www.myspace.com/tameimpala[/url] (particularly half full glass of wine) James

[quote name='Twigman' post='464133' date='Apr 16 2009, 04:55 PM']Some observations on todays music 'scene'... Those of us old enough to remember vinyl records lived through the golden age of DJ tune selection. Every record in your box had its own sleeve, some with a picture, some without. But vinyl records had hundreds of memory tags which helped you remember the tune, from the picture to the type faces used, the finish of the cardboard to the width of the spine. Even the memory of when you bought it, where you bought it, from, why you bought it, what you did to the record after you got it (tore the edge off the sleeve, put your coffee cup on the sleeve) and where you put it in your record box helped you remember it. And if you played it a lot the actual record itself would become lodged in your memory; the weight and colour of the vinyl, the groove pattern, the label, your fingerprints. And, of course, the artist and the title of the track would help as well. But there were many occasions where you could remember the tune but not remember the artist or title: you had a more complicated memory of the track, but a useable one nonetheless when it came to pulling it out at the right moment in your set. In many respects the artist name and song title weren't critical. But now they are. Nowadays they are often all we have. What strikes me in this age of downloaded digital music, is how hard it is to remember tracks from just the artist name and track title, especially given the increase in how many tracks you get sent or buy. And this is made more difficult because people are using the same rules for artist names and song titles that they used when records came in cardboard sleeves with unique cover art. Its OK to call yourself Unchallenged Emotion and call your track Monday Morning if you had some fancy logo or photo on the record that made those things come to life. But if all we have to go on is a line of text in iTunes or Beatport, what chance have we got to form some kind of emotional attachment to you or your track? What makes it all the more maddening to me is when there is a very memorable part of the track, maybe even the main hook, that doesn't get used as the track name. "Oh I know that one, its got the girl saying "Save Me" in it." Why isn't it called "Save Me" then? In the good old days it was considered a little crass sometimes to be obvious about your song titles. (Song 2? "Whoo-hooo"?) But these days, you have to be obvious, surely. With so little difference between one downloaded file and another, you have to work even harder to get noticed and be remembered. Things have changed. So, if I may be so bold I'd like to make a couple of suggestions: feel free to ignore them as I haven't convinced myself I know the full solution to the problem at all. The first is to think about using your real name as your artist name, if you are a solo act, and not pick some meaningless name from the online artist name generator that I'm sure exists out there that come up with crap like "Unaffected Electricity", "Truncated Toiletries" or "Conjugated Verb". If it is meaningless to you it is certainly meaningless to everyone else, and people tend to forget things that are meaningless. If you don't want to use your real name, come up with something memorable, something that instantly conveys something visual or emotional or both, like, er, Dead Mouse. And the second thing is to think long and hard about what the track should be called. In almost every example the song file is not your best bet ("Wednesday Doodle") as it will mean a lot to you but nothing to everyone else. I'd say the main hook, or some other signature element ("Pjiano") may give you some good ideas, and certainly if there's a vocal stab, however brief, seriously think about naming the track after that, no matter how late it entered proceedings. There's nothing new in any of this, by the way. Take a listen to "Footsteps In Snow" by Debussy. I'm sure in this case the song title came before the music, but the point is they are one and the same. It does exactly what it says on the tin. On the other hand I'm sure I've heard Chopin's "Op 15, #3, Lento in G min" but I'm buggered if I can remember how it goes.[/quote] Some great points here. Definitely the explosion of the data age has made the "ownership" of a music recording less tangible, and less personally meaningful (from the point of view of memories of hunting down that elusive album in some second-hand shop in the backstreets of Camden or whatever). That is a loss, but has the reverse benefit of increased accessibility to everything thats out there. Good point about band and song names too.. I make use of the digital age to find songs though by typing chunks of lyrics into google to find out the band and song name (usually works pretty well)! James

[quote name='bilbo230763' post='463673' date='Apr 16 2009, 09:40 AM']When I was a young developing player, I could go out and see name bands doing 40 date national tours and each tour would present you with a new support band (or two). There also seemed to be more festivals etc.[/quote] I guess you are talking about Jazz festivals... Not so sure about those. There are almost too many indie/rock type festivals IMHO. A market trader friend of mine is going to 20 festivals over the summer.. more than 1 a week! James

[quote name='The Funk' post='463984' date='Apr 16 2009, 02:57 PM']Yes. There's no money to be made from music now, which should be liberating artistically, except everyone's desperate to be as big as Elvis and The Beatles. Those days are gone. Just write a good tune FFS and consider it a bonus if just one person who's not shagging you or related to you likes your music. And get a real job. Music is not an excuse to waste your life doing f*** all.[/quote] Not sure it is just music there's no money in at the moment..... In my opinion, a lot of the profits from music industry were generated by people who decided what music people wanted to listen to, marketed it by altering the name/line-up/image etc. of the band (or even just concocted a "band" out of nothing more than some fresh faced young boys/girls) then forced it down everyone's throats through radio stations that were basically completely under the control of the major labels.. Majors got twitchy once the rug was pulled out under their feet in terms of only letting the public hear what they wanted them to hear - with the explosion of the internet, net radio stations etc... I really think that was what killed record sales (or sales of the "top" albums) rather than mp3s per say.. People could hear what they like, and buy it direct from the artist (or pirate it.. whatever floats their boat). Personally, I have never really thought downloading illegal mp3s was worth the hassle - seems much easier (and less stressful) to buy from places like emusic.. Although I'm not in the industry, I'm still pretty sure there are some solid business models for bands to make money - just different than before, and thankfully not involving the major labels. But this is beside the point.. I really think there are some really great new bands now (at least in the alt/indie/rock/whatever scene).. great ways to listen to them (podcasts, myspace, emusic).. easy ways to source rare and previously hard-to-obtain albums (amazon. emusic, itunes (to a certain extent) etc.) Also, there is the retrospectoscope, which I think has already been mentioned with regard to the Beatles. Thinking back to the early 90s, which was when I really started getting into music, bands like Nirvana and Stone Roses were great, but also they were just another band - they didn't really stand out then to me as being the ones that were so fantastically better than any of the others at the time. In fact, I probably preferred other less (now) famous bands like Pavement, Field Mice and The Wedding Present.. So, I see no need to be so morose, but perhaps in the genre of Rawk things are less rosy? James