h a l f b a k e r ynon-lame halfbakery tagline
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
You could divide music up into the different instruments, or you could divide it up into melody, harmony, foreground, background, harmony, etc. But the end goal should be people who want to customize their listening experience should be able to. This should be simple. In fact a different microphone records
each of the separate parts in the studio.
Reasons to agree this is a good idea:
This would be of special benefit to those who are interested in trying to play an instrument.
Principal: Empower the consumer. Let them take control of the music that they listen to. Let them be part of the process.
Reasons to disagree that this is a good idea:
I hear it already sort of exist. Someone at work said that they have machines that will take voices out of music, so I guess you could lip-sink along or do karaoke, but I think this could be used to filter out any instrument, or control the volume of any instrument. I never took a digital signals processing class at school, but I think it would be pretty cool, and it could be done.
Maybe we would need DVD Audio to have all of the extra data, or maybe there could be a digital signals processing (DSP) chip that automatically does it. If this was so, there would probably be a delay.
Musical Karaoke
The_20Musical_20Karaoke_20Machine
an application [jonthegeologist, Mar 22 2005]
First step to baked.
http://www.lifehack...ils-tune-100677.php
Reznor invites you to remix a Nine Inch Nails tune. [brodie, Apr 28 2005]
[link]
|
| |
The "vocalist eliminator" systems on some audio players simply remove everything that appears identically in both stereo channels, on the basis that this is how the vocal track is traditionally mixed. This is fine as long as a) the vocal track actually *is* mixed like this, and b) nothing else is. I'm not sure how well these criteria hold these days.
If I understand correctly, you want to mute other parts of the audio similarly, and you could only do this in the same way if you knew where in the stereo image each instrument was. For example, if you knew that the bass guitar was mixed so that it appeared 80% left and 20% right, you could look for anything which appears in both channels in the ratio 4:1. (Purpose-made karaoke backing tracks are available, where one track does not actually appear at all, but they tend to assume that the vocal only will be live.)
A simpler, and more reliable, way of achieving your end would be for publishers to issue a less-than-final mix (where "final" indicates "mixed down to stereo"), say an 8-track, for use on a player which can reproduce each track individually. You could then mute whichever track you wished.
However, I wonder how large and influential the market is for such a system.
The tape I made with my band several years ago was recorded on eight-track using S-VHS video tape, and could be used to achieve this end, but the player required (Alesis A-DAT) costs a bit more than most people would want to pay, even without a mixer. |
|
| |
//Armature Musicians// Wire musicians?
I like the idea, but DSP alone isn't going to do it, as [angel] noted. I guess you could take multiple simultaneous MP3 streams at medium bit rate, and have another track contain the "mix" information. By my guess, you could get about twenty 64kbit streams into a x1 CD audio stream.
[+] For reminding me of a documentary about Paul Simon's Graceland album, where they took the original tapes and "demixed" it. |
|
| |
However, can I point out that stating reasons to agree or disagree makes it sound like we are being talked down to and are unable to work things out for ourselves. While this is quite endearing at first, it rapidly wears. |
|
| |
Apart from this, I think you have some really good ideas, and this is definitely one of them.[edit] |
|
| |
ha! I knew it would happen to me! I try to enter pendants corner and...well, it was bound to happen. I, for one, am definately an armature. |
|
| |
My brain works really weird. I am dyslexic, and have slight ADD. I don't know where I would be without spell check, but alas it does not help with “their/there”. |
|
| |
I'm not totally stupid though. I am an electrical engineer, and amazing enough am able to work in a somewhat professional work environment! |
|
| |
[+]...but what really burns me up is that my reason for voting with a bread product is one of the ones listed! Grrr. In my defence, I didn't actually read that far down so I didn't know until I read the annos. |
|
| |
Other reasons for agreeing:
1. Being told to by the Voices.
2. It contains no mention of pirates, sphericons or custard.
3. You're not French, and neither is this idea. Is it? |
|
| |
Other reasons for disagreeing:
1. It's Tuesday.
2. It contains no mention of pirates, sphericons or custard.
3. Nobody's actually said this idea isn't French, so it could be.
3.Er.. that's it. Sorry. If none of the above reasons apply, you're not allowed to fishbone. Shame, but there it is. |
|
| |
[+] I never really liked the graphic equalizer. This would be much better. |
|
| |
<SNL referrence>..."MORE COWBELL!" </snlr> |
|
| |
If you have the tracks separate, this would not be difficult, as long as you have a mixing board, or similar software for your computer, but I’m not sure it would be helpful. If you don’t know how to play a song, and can’t figure it out listening to the mixed track isn’t it just easier to find the tab or score?
Problem—any effects added when the music is being mixed.
[AWOL] how did they "demix" the Graceland album? |
|
| |
//how did they "demix" the Graceland album?//
From the original tapes, which would probably be 32-track, maybe 64.
Back in the sixties (aah!), even famous bands recorded direct to 8-track because that's all there was. Les Paul had done some pioneering work on multi-tracking, Phil Spector was known for it of course, and Pet Sounds was one of the ground-breaking works. Really, the next major creative use of multi-layered recording was A Rainbow in Curved Air, followed by Tubular Bells. |
|
| |
//stating reasons to agree or disagree makes it sound like we are being talked down to and are unable to work things out for ourselves.//
I don't agree with that, I think it shows the multi-faceted thought process of the author, indicating that although he likes the idea, he sees flaws which he himself (that should be a band, "He Himself") finds to be quite obvious and perhaps has doubts about it, yet feels as though the idea is just strong enough to be shared. But that's just me.
I always wanted the ability to do this, since there are so many bands that I would otherwise like had it not been for one particular instrument/vocalist that I can't stand (Rush comes to mind). I know some older songs have guitars recorded on one channel and not the other, and the same with drums. I believe there's a Hendrix song or two that does this. Jesus was way cool. He could have played guitar better than Hendrix. He could have told the future. He could have baked the most delicious cake in the world. He could have scored more goals than Wayne Gretzky. He could have danced better than Barishnikov. Jesus could have been funnier than any comedian than you can think of. Jesus was way cool. |
|
| |
//Jesus was way cool.//
But you don't like Geddy Lee's singing? Man, you are strange! |
|
| |
//Jesus was way cool.//
Okay, I'll make this one easy for once. It's a King Missile song I was listening to when I wrote that annotation. Word for word plagiarism, and IT FELT GOOD.
Jesus was just a hippy with great PR, that's not very cool. |
|
| |
Always wanted to do this; needs a catchier title, though. |
|
| |
CD players couldn't do this without changing the entire post-production process--from mixing in different formats to finding a cost-effective market (DNE) to manufacturing new cd players capable of playing such a feature. Bone. |
|
| |
I would like to single out some instruments.
Sometimes I want to pick out that fast bass line, but the drummer bangs and crashes over the top. It would be nice to quieten the other instruments.
But the DSP would have to be *really* fancy to do this from one or two tracks.
I like the idea of an advanced MP3, with several tracks.Could that work? |
|
| |
For jazz musicians, there are a lot of play-along CDs out there. Jamey Aebersold makes a large series. IIRC they have piano on the right stereo track, and drums and bass on the left. Horn players can play along with the whole rhythm section; pianists can turn off the right speaker and play along with the drum and bass. Great way to practice. |
|
| |
They're good rhythm sections, too; I saw one once with John Patitucci on bass. |
|
| |
There's a guitar magazine (Total Guitar perhaps?) that includes a free CD every month of tracks with vocals removed, rhythm guitar removed, lead guitar removed etc, so that you can play along. You can't choose which instrument is removed, but there are various versions on the CD. |
|
| |
Also, S&M by Metallica with the San Francisco Symphony Orchestra has separate audio tracks for the band and the orchestra, so you can listen to either, as the mood takes you (or so I've been led to believe - haven't actually got it myself... yet) |
|
| |