ilovefuzz.com

theactionindex wrote:

Achtane wrote:No pedal is worth $800.
YEAH I SAID IT

BUT WHAT ABOUT THE KLON TOANZ. 'SPENSIVE STUFF SOUNDS BETTER DUHHHHH.

BRO I ALREADY HAVE A DAMBL FOR THE DAMBL TOANZ I DONT NEED TE KLONTOANS

NOW EXCUSE ME I NEED TO BEAT OFF WHILE SNIFFING ITS TURRET BOARD

$300 is the most I've spent on a pedal. Would really have a hard time doing it again.

Achtane wrote:

theactionindex wrote:

Achtane wrote:No pedal is worth $800.
YEAH I SAID IT

BUT WHAT ABOUT THE KLON TOANZ. 'SPENSIVE STUFF SOUNDS BETTER DUHHHHH.

BRO I ALREADY HAVE A DAMBL FOR THE DAMBL TOANZ I DONT NEED TE KLONTOANS

NOW EXCUSE ME I NEED TO BEAT OFF WHILE SNIFFING ITS TURRET BOARD

KLONBL TOANZ ARE THE TOANZ

unownunown wrote:i reaaaaaaaaaaalllly don't like asymmetric meters.

and i somewhat dislike mathy/overly technical music in general. i feel like it's so often nerdy, not even in the good way. awkward time signatures don't necessarily make music more interesting. i feel like people sometimes cover up their inability to write a good song by attempting to blow people away with complexity. but that's just my opinion. and to some people that obnoxious technicality might define good music, so what do i know?

I love em, I feel dancey when I hear something in 7/4. seriously. If it's well done I love weird time signatures. Only problem is that I can't count. I am rhythmically challenged. WHich leads to a) writing songs in weird meters all the time and b) not knowing which are weird meters.

I like this and think it's asymmetric:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmj176eFXEI[/youtube]

I've had a phase of this stuff but now I can't really listen to it anymore:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xod_CrP-YQs[/youtube]

It's not all musical wankery. And weird meters can be really groovy. last example:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEshZAwcM6o[/youtube]

Enough scholarly shit. I'm not even sure about these being in weird meters. Though I'd be surprised if the indian stuff was. The confession: I like to act as if I knew about shit even when I don't. Usually I get away with it.

i might be wrong is in definite straight 4/4, listen to the accents on the second and fourth beat. s'all about the drums. radiohead doesn't do as much weird time stuff as people think they do, hell, even myxamatosis is in straight 4/4.

second track is in 7/4, too. i don't really care about indian music being in asymmetric time. it doesn't bother me nearly as much.

i'm not saying all asymmetric stuff is technical wankery but i feel like a lot of it is. i can't get down to asymmetric meter, it just doesn't feel natural to me at all. it has its place like everything else, though

i'm not saying everyone should play only in 4/4 all the time though. lol. i loooove 12/8 (i guess that's effectively 4/4, depending on what you're writing)

lol, I was just listening to Tarkus in my car tonight/this morning. 10/8, baby! I love it when abnormal time signatures work well.

7/4(Shoreline) by Broken Social Scene:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uev2J_cBHjQ[/youtube]

I also recorded a song that was in 7/4 based on the bass line of Iron Man(but in a totally different rhythm). I'm too lazy to figure out a good way to post it at the moment.

I can listen to stuff in common timings, but I don't like to write that way. I get bored if what I'm playing (of my own music) isn't changing time every few seconds.

i don't really care for uber-complexity in music, unless it's deployed in a way that actually goes somewhere. to me way too many bands substitute mere complexity and the ability to string notes together for melody and compositional skills. to me that was one of Zappa's fortes, the ability to write complicated music that was still musically attractive.

in general, i'm not one to consider stomp boxes that cost more than $200 unless i really need a particular capability. the most expensive thing i have in the house (excepting the PodXT and its floor controller board) is a Truly Beautiful Disaster. it boggles my mind when i see $300 tremolos in small MXR-sized enclosures. there are boxes i could see spending stupid dollars on, but they're things like the Prometheus or digital delays that do otherwise irreproducible shit.

unownunown wrote: i loooove 12/8 (i guess that's effectively 4/4, depending on what you're writing)

wouldn't that actually be 3/4, not 4/4?

3/2 or 6/4 I believe...

I only play DAG in 4/4, so fuck off. :rocckkkkkk:

no, the 8 means it's compound meter which gets broken into triplet subdivisions. so you count it 1 2 3/ 1 2 3 / 1 2 3 / 1 2 3. 9/8 is effectively 3/4 for the same reasons.

I was always ballz with meters...

futuresailors wrote:

Scary!

dubkitty wrote:i don't really care for uber-complexity in music, unless it's deployed in a way that actually goes somewhere. to me way too many bands substitute mere complexity and the ability to string notes together for melody and compositional skills. to me that was one of Zappa's fortes, the ability to write complicated music that was still musically attractive.

This. It's why I think Rush killed prog. They pushed it to the point beyond musical salience and relies on complexity rather than exploit it. Yes, on the other hand

I like the way pickup/bridge covers look on basses but playing with them sucks.

If like...there was some kind of hologram projector that you could use to give the illusion of a pickup cover....then maybe that would be playable.