Tuning Drums

Android · Post by **Android** » Fri Mar 30, 2007 3:09 am

check out the shuffle on an actual TR - x0x drum machine

provaznik · Post by **provaznik** » Fri Mar 30, 2007 3:13 am

i think that you all are talking about poly rhythm's here. for instance it is a 4/4 measure with, say, 5 evenly spaced notes playing in it over the duration of the measure. this is a crude example of course as this can get much more complex but you get the idea.

Ingemar · Post by **Ingemar** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:20 pm

in my opinion changing the time signature is overestimated, and should be left for the very experimental stuff. Just set your quantisiser's grid to 1/64's (or 1/128's) and you got yourself quite some freedom to make shuffle loops, or whatever else you feel like.

jessejames · Post by **jessejames** » Wed Apr 18, 2007 1:08 am

^^Can Ableton get tighter than 1/32? I can't get 1/64 on there.

Ver 6.

Shoma · Post by **Shoma** » Wed Apr 18, 2007 1:13 am

jessejames wrote:^^Can Ableton get tighter than 1/32? I can't get 1/64 on there.

Ver 6.

yes, just keep pushing CTRL+1 (to narrow) and CTRL+2 (to widen) the grid

steevio · Post by **steevio** » Wed May 09, 2007 7:36 pm

Carl Smart wrote:in my opinion changing the time signature is overestimated, and should be left for the very experimental stuff. Just set your quantisiser's grid to 1/64's (or 1/128's) and you got yourself quite some freedom to make shuffle loops, or whatever else you feel like.

i think theres some confusion here between shuffles and time signatures, the two things are not related.
a shuffle is simply the delaying of alternate 16ths or 8ths etc. to create a swing or a wobble to the rhythm.
polyrhythms or rhythms layered in different time signatures, do not need to be left for very experimental stuff, infact they form the basis of most african and subsequently cuban and latin-american rhythms, which in turn are at the heart of virtually all the dance music of the 20th and 21st century. you can hardly call that experimental, its what makes people move !!
dont let yourself be shortsighted by the limitations of alot of the poor quality minimal music around, and check out the wider world of music for ideas.

Ruso · Post by **Ruso** » Thu May 10, 2007 8:39 am

well said, and just so you know only a few years ago minimal WAS experimental, and real minimal still is experimental, the problem with minimal especially arround the US is the fact that it migrated more into house-ish sounds with too many elements... it's no longer really minimal...

bend the rules, if you never messed arround with different time signatures do so. It's very useful. At one point I put together an hour long set which used only triplets (3 instead of 4 per measure).

steevio · Post by **steevio** » Thu May 10, 2007 1:01 pm

Ruso wrote:well said, and just so you know only a few years ago minimal WAS experimental, and real minimal still is experimental, the problem with minimal especially arround the US is the fact that it migrated more into house-ish sounds with too many elements... it's no longer really minimal...

bend the rules, if you never messed arround with different time signatures do so. It's very useful. At one point I put together an hour long set which used only triplets (3 instead of 4 per measure).

totally !
minimal has actually become a term of derision in alot of music circles recently, people equate minimal with 'nothing going on', boring' etc
but why ?? it is a perfectly legitimate musical form, but its been adulterated and watered down by a lack of imagination in recent times
sorry this is way off-topic
SAVE MINIMAL !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!