28 Feb
2007
28 Feb
'07
8:35 a.m.
Greetings:
I have no idea if anyone's ever used a tracker to create a hit song, but
it is unfortunate that trackers are usually associated with a particular
style of music. I have heard some very cool stuff in module formats,
though I'll agree that most of the music-made-with-trackers that I've
heard tends towards rather uninteresting dance beat music. I don't
believe that trackers necessarily impose any kind of style restriction,
you can bend them into doing non-beat oriented stuff. Kuno's "Substantia
Grisea" is an excellent example.
Developers are often surprised at what users wind up doing with their
tools.
Trackers seem to have come along at a time just before cheap samplers
hit the market, which might have drawn attention away from the
developing tracker communities. Nevertheless, those communities remain
strong, a lot of people like to make music with trackers, and I don't
think they're overly concerned with their lack of popular success. ;)
Best,
dp
28 Feb
28 Feb
8:46 a.m.
On Wed, 2007-02-28 at 07:55 -0500, Dave Phillips wrote:
Trackers seem to have come along at a time just before
cheap samplers
hit the market, which might have drawn attention away from the
developing tracker communities. Nevertheless, those communities remain
strong, a lot of people like to make music with trackers, and I don't
think they're overly concerned with their lack of popular success. ;)
I started tracking when i was 15 years old, because it was virtually the only method to
get your hands on something that worked like a sampler.
--
Leonard Ritter
-- Freelance Art & Logic
-- http://www.leonard-ritter.com
10:15 a.m.
On Wednesday 28 February 2007 13:46, Leonard Ritter wrote:
On Wed, 2007-02-28 at 07:55 -0500, Dave Phillips
wrote:
Hi Leonard. I DL'd all the chippy stuff last night, and am working my way
through it now, with occidental nemesis playing at the moment. Really nice
track. I'll DL the dance stuff next, but there's about 5 pages of that.
James Shuttlworth who uses Cheestracker used to post quite a bit of stuff, but
hasn't done so for ages now.
I have Cheestracker, Soundtracker, a couple of Windows ones that work under
Wine, and most recently your Aldrin, but still only have the original
release, and havn't got around to updating it yet (keep getting distracted).
Perhaps I'm getting a bit old at 58, but I like dance, trance, and all that
sort of stuff. I had a step sequencer (Making Waves) when I used Windows,
and made a few tunes with that. I have GB's of .wav sound samples from
magazine cover discs, and as I've never been able to get Making Waves running
properly under Wine, a tracker seemed the way to go. Up to now though, I seem
to have spent more time playing other peoples tracker files on them, than
doing anything constructive.
What would be nice would be a really good tutorial with lots of examples.
James put quite a few tips on using Cheestracker up on his site, and I found
other bits and pieces on the Internet.
Perhaps I should just try harder, remove the distractions (mailing list
emails), and have a real go at putting a tune together.
Thanks for all the tunes you've made available.
Nigel.
btw. I will be upgrading Aldrin today. I've got it installed on FC5.
Trackers seem to have come along at a time just
before cheap samplers
hit the market, which might have drawn attention away from the
developing tracker communities. Nevertheless, those communities remain
strong, a lot of people like to make music with trackers, and I don't
think they're overly concerned with their lack of popular success. ;)
I started tracking when i was 15 years old, because it was virtually the
only method to get your hands on something that worked like a sampler. 
9:48 a.m.
Dave Phillips <dlphillips(a)woh.rr.com> writes:
I have no idea if anyone's ever used a tracker to
create a hit song,
There was at least one group that had a hit back in the mid-90s using
Protracker on a couple of Amigas -- I remember an interview with them
in one of the UK Amiga magazines. (A quick web search suggests it
might have been Dex & Jonesey, who were better known later for
remixing other peoples' songs -- if anyone's got the February 1998 CU
Amiga sitting around they can confirm whether that's the article I'm
thinking of...)
--
Adam Sampson <ats(a)offog.org> <http://offog.org/>
5:25 p.m.
On Wednesday 28 February 2007 07:55, Dave Phillips wrote:
I have no idea if anyone's ever used a tracker to
create a hit
song, but it is unfortunate that trackers are usually
associated with a particular style of music. I have heard some
I've done some prog rock type stuff in Buzz, which I hope to pick
up again soon in Aldrin. The last thing I did with it back in
2002 didn't have any meter or tempo changes, and I made the
mistake of "mastering" it with ear buds so it's super muddy.
But in spite of its name, it's really not a dance song:
http://www.kudla.org/mymusic/dancetest.mp3
Not all loop-based music has to be something you need to be
tripping out on Tina to appreciate. I don't think I could use
trackers for all my music, but they really provide a lot of
inspiration for some songs. If nothing else, I think I could
use a tracker for any kind of music for which I'd consider using
a drum machine.
Rob
1:57 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: composing with trackers
greg <gkjoyce(a)gmail.com>om>, on Fri Mar 02, 2007 [11:40:56 PM] said:
tripping out on Tina? This very message was the only
result in google
for such a phrase. Please, elucidate.
Hi;
Just a guess:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=tina
Paul
set(a)pobox.com
tripping out on Tina to appreciate. I don't
think I could use
4 Mar
4 Mar
6:27 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: composing with trackers
Hi Chuck,
In a tracker, you don't have to write in 4/4-- you can freely change the
lengths of each pattern and even cut patterns short with a simple command.
How intuitive this is depends on both the user and the program. Also,
notes are not all the same length. Rather, a note in a tracker turns a note
on. If you have no sustain on that instrument, then yes they will all be
the same length (as in a sequencer). Notes are also not necessarily
quantized, as every good tracker has commands to delay and stop notes on
ticks and not rows. Furthermore, many good musicians that use trackers
increase the speed so that every row is a 32nd note and not a 16th note.
As to the comment that you can only produce "retarded dance music" with a
tracker, I will say this: while trackers are designed for styles of
music with repeating sections (whether it's a dance track or simply
verse/chorus/verse/etc), you can do a wide range of styles with them.
Judging the tools by the majority of music created with them would maybe
lead someone to also believe that Cubase is also incapable of anything but
dance music, right? =)
Hope this helps! Trackers are very complex and are often misunderstood as
the aim is slightly different from that of a sequencer.
Long time tracker (since '92),
Louis Gorenfeld
6 Mar
6 Mar
2:39 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: composing with trackers
On 3/4/07, Louis Gorenfeld <louis.gorenfeld(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Chuck,
In a tracker, you don't have to write in 4/4-- you can freely change the
lengths of each pattern and even cut patterns short with a simple command.
How intuitive this is depends on both the user and the program. Also, notes
It's an extra step to not write in 4/4; which is not the case sitting
at a piano. That's all I'm saying.
As to the comment that you can only produce
"retarded dance music" with a
tracker,
I NEVER said that. Why on Earth would you misquote me like that??
I said:
"If you've never written music, and you don't own any instruments, and
you open a program for the first time that shows you 8 divisions per
measure with a steady beat, you'll probably make a lot of music before
you discover what other options are available. Multiply this by a
million users, and you've got the makings of a long-term association
with RDM (retarded dance music)."
I'm explaining why people have negative associations with trackers,
and why I have tended to avoid them. At no point did I say they were
bad or that they only make RDM. Do not say I said things I didn't
say.
-Chuckk
--
http://www.badmuthahubbard.com
3:51 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: composing with trackers
On Tuesday 06 March 2007 13:39, Chuckk Hubbard wrote:
On 3/4/07, Louis Gorenfeld
<louis.gorenfeld(a)gmail.com> wrote:
It is the case with pretty much every computerized composition
tool, though, not just trackers. If you're using your computer
as anything more than a glorified tape deck (which you can get
away with if you don't do a lot of overdubbing, like if you're
in a band that records live or you're just a guy with a piano
and nothing else.... I'm not), the programs you use to manage
the structure of your music are almost invariably going to
assume you're writing in 4/4 by default.
I found it just as easy to transcribe this one thing I did with
shifting meters (7/8, 6/8, 7/8, 6/8, 7/8, 9/8, repeat) in a
tracker as I did in DOP, which was my Windows sequencer of
choice at the time. In fact, I've used traditional sequencers
that won't take a meter with a "numerator" greater than 6, which
was always a real bummer.
Rob
Hi Chuck,
In a tracker, you don't have to write in 4/4-- you can
freely change the lengths of each pattern and even cut
It's an extra step to
not write in 4/4; which is not the case
sitting at a piano. That's all I'm saying. 
7 Mar
7 Mar
5:07 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: Re: composing with trackers
Chuckk Hubbard escribe:
"If you've never written music, and you
don't own any instruments, and
you open a program for the first time that shows you 8 divisions per
measure with a steady beat, you'll probably make a lot of music before
you discover what other options are available. Multiply this by a
million users, and you've got the makings of a long-term association
with RDM (retarded dance music)."
Regarding trackers and other hardware or software tools, I've always
thought that it's a pure matter of talent turning your limitations
into your style.
Listening to first trance or ambient house music from late eighties or
early nineties I enjoy a lot how drums sampled in 12 bit machines
sound. Or those funny guitar sounds sampled using an Amiga computer...
So, trackers are ok for those who find them comfortable to compose
with, and not ok for everybody else.
Cordially, Ismael
--
Ismael Valladolid Torres m. +34679156321
La media hostia j. ivalladt(a)gmail.com
http://lamediahostia.blogspot.com/
2:31 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: composing with trackers
Hi Chuck,
Oops, You said associated with.. apologies! That'll teach me to not
use the reply button =) I have to agree too that using software to
compose can be less intuitive than sitting at a piano.
As to the comment that you can only produce
"retarded dance music" with a
tracker,
I NEVER said that. Why on Earth would you misquote me like that??
I said:
"If you've never written music, and you don't own any instruments, and
you open a program for the first time that shows you 8 divisions per
measure with a steady beat, you'll probably make a lot of music before
you discover what other options are available. Multiply this by a
million users, and you've got the makings of a long-term association
with RDM (retarded dance music)."
2:41 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: composing with trackers
No problem. Sometimes it's easier to respond to what you want people
to have said than what they said.
On 3/7/07, Louis Gorenfeld <louis.gorenfeld(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Chuck,
Oops, You said associated with.. apologies! That'll teach me to not
use the reply button =) I have to agree too that using software to
compose can be less intuitive than sitting at a piano.
--
http://www.badmuthahubbard.com
As to the comment that you can only produce
"retarded dance music" with a
tracker,
I NEVER said that. Why on Earth would you misquote me like that??
I said:
"If you've never written music, and you don't own any instruments, and
you open a program for the first time that shows you 8 divisions per
measure with a steady beat, you'll probably make a lot of music before
you discover what other options are available. Multiply this by a
million users, and you've got the makings of a long-term association
with RDM (retarded dance music)." 
28 Feb
28 Feb
5:45 p.m.
Dave Phillips <dlphillips(a)woh.rr.com> writes:
I have no idea if anyone's ever used a tracker
I think it's really great what beast[1] is doing with their editor;
you can select which view you want on the same data.
It's unfortunate that this excellent editor is not separated from the
synthesis core, but maybe one day. It also, yet, does not support JACK
MIDI;).
[1]http://beast.gtk.org
--
Esben Stien is b0ef@e s a
http://www. s t n m
irc://irc. b - i . e/%23contact
sip:b0ef@ e e
jid:b0ef@ n n
1 Mar
1 Mar
10:44 a.m.
I've used very few trackers. I think I was turned off that the
default is for all notes to be the same length, and that changing the
number of beats in any measure seemed kind of involved.
If you've never written music, and you don't own any instruments, and
you open a program for the first time that shows you 8 divisions per
measure with a steady beat, you'll probably make a lot of music before
you discover what other options are available. Multiply this by a
million users, and you've got the makings of a long-term association
with RDM (retarded dance music). Try entering Debussy into a tracker
and see how intuitive it is; and yet the music itself is very easy to
listen to.
I bet people's music would be far more beautiful if they would sing
freely and often and then transcribe what they were singing, instead
of transcribing before the music even exists. Or maybe it's just a
case where the number of people who write good music is less than the
number of people who write bad music in general?
-Chuckk
On 2/28/07, Dave Phillips <dlphillips(a)woh.rr.com> wrote:
Greetings:
I have no idea if anyone's ever used a tracker to create a hit song, but
it is unfortunate that trackers are usually associated with a particular
style of music. I have heard some very cool stuff in module formats,
though I'll agree that most of the music-made-with-trackers that I've
heard tends towards rather uninteresting dance beat music. I don't
believe that trackers necessarily impose any kind of style restriction,
you can bend them into doing non-beat oriented stuff. Kuno's "Substantia
Grisea" is an excellent example.
Developers are often surprised at what users wind up doing with their
tools.
Trackers seem to have come along at a time just before cheap samplers
hit the market, which might have drawn attention away from the
developing tracker communities. Nevertheless, those communities remain
strong, a lot of people like to make music with trackers, and I don't
think they're overly concerned with their lack of popular success. ;)
Best,
dp
--
http://www.badmuthahubbard.com
10:59 a.m.
Chuckk Hubbard wrote:
... maybe it's just a case where the number of
people who write good
music is less than the
number of people who write bad music in general?
It's one of the universal constants. I'm sure that when we finally make
contact with extraterrestrial aliens they'll tell us they have the same
problem.
Best,
dp
6:22 p.m.
Chuckk Hubbard wrote:
I bet people's music would be far more beautiful
if they would sing
freely and often and then transcribe what they were singing, instead
of transcribing before the music even exists.
True!
I completely abandoned composing at the computer for exactly that
reason. I find it quicker to experiment with everything from melody,
harmony, lyrics, modulations to form when at the piano. Also I found
that I only make good tunes when playing and *singing* along.
I'm sure others have succeeded where I failed, but that how it works for me.
--
peace, love & harmony
Atte
http://www.atte.dk | quintet: http://www.anagrammer.dk
| compositions: http://www.atte.dk/compositions
8:56 p.m.
On Thursday 01 March 2007 17:03, Atte André Jensen wrote:
I completely abandoned composing at the computer for
exactly
that reason. I find it quicker to experiment with everything
from melody, harmony, lyrics, modulations to form when at the
piano. Also I found that I only make good tunes when playing
and *singing* along.
I do most of my composing when I'm driving nowadays.... it must
be the only time when my brain's able to disengage and let the
melodies out. But sometimes I compose while sitting at the
piano or with a guitar or bass on my lap.
I can't recall a time when I've been able to compose anything in
a computer program, but that was my ex's preferred modus
operandi. He was one of those guys who would rather write sheet
music and learn to play it than just sit down and play. And
some of it was actually kinda good, in that sort of Philip
Glass, modern classical way.
Rob
9:56 p.m.
Rob wrote:
On Thursday 01 March 2007 17:03, Atte André Jensen
wrote:
I prefer a piano, but guitar's OK.
I completely abandoned composing at the computer
for exactly
that reason. I find it quicker to experiment with everything
from melody, harmony, lyrics, modulations to form when at the
piano. Also I found that I only make good tunes when playing
and *singing* along.
I do most of my composing when I'm driving nowadays.... it must
be the only time when my brain's able to disengage and let the
melodies out. But sometimes I compose while sitting at the
piano or with a guitar or bass on my lap. I can't recall a time when I've been able to
compose anything in
a computer program, but that was my ex's preferred modus
operandi. He was one of those guys who would rather write sheet
music and learn to play it than just sit down and play. And
some of it was actually kinda good, in that sort of Philip
Glass, modern classical way.
I can do both, but playing is more a way of getting raw material into
the computer, where it can be turned into a composition.
--
David
gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com
authenticity, honesty, community
2 Mar
2 Mar
3:25 a.m.
On 3/1/07, Rob <lau(a)kudla.org> wrote:
On Thursday 01 March 2007 17:03, Atte André Jensen
wrote:
I sing any time I drive, and it really feels awesome to exercise what
I've learned in school. Alas, I'm in Philly, and I left my vehicle at
my mom's house while I'm here, so I pretty much only drive when I'm on
break. If I would just not care and sing everywhere, I'd likely be a
far better musician for it! (and have far fewer friends)
-Chuckk
I completely abandoned composing at the computer
for exactly
that reason. I find it quicker to experiment with everything
from melody, harmony, lyrics, modulations to form when at the
piano. Also I found that I only make good tunes when playing
and *singing* along.
I do most of my composing when I'm driving nowadays.... it must
be the only time when my brain's able to disengage and let the
melodies out. But sometimes I compose while sitting at the
piano or with a guitar or bass on my lap. 
3:23 a.m.
On 3/1/07, Atte André Jensen <atte.jensen(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Chuckk Hubbard wrote:
I had an interesting quandary, though, a few years ago, when I became
interested in extended just intonation tunings, with no limits on
modulation, i.e., an indefinite number of possible notes, so no scale.
There could be ways to make keyboards do it, by modulating with a
pedal or something, but I found software to be pretty quick. I wish
now that I had the piano skills I was just starting to develop when I
stopped, but I'm still more interested in extended, unscaled tunings.
-Chuckk
I bet people's music would be far more
beautiful if they would sing
freely and often and then transcribe what they were singing, instead
of transcribing before the music even exists.
True!
I completely abandoned composing at the computer for exactly that
reason. I find it quicker to experiment with everything from melody,
harmony, lyrics, modulations to form when at the piano. Also I found
that I only make good tunes when playing and *singing* along. 
6:16 a.m.
Chuckk Hubbard wrote:
To present a totally different angle - I learnt all my musical theory
using a tracker (never having done any traditional music except
bellringing years ago), and now livecode all my music, which feels like
the most natural way to do it for me.
Livecoding also means I can create visuals and animation *at the same
time* as music - which is kind of a goal in itself for me.
Also linux is a really good environment for this kind of experimentation.
cheers,
dave
I bet people's music would be far more
beautiful if they would sing
freely and often and then transcribe what they were singing, instead
of transcribing before the music even exists.
True!
I completely abandoned composing at the computer for exactly that
reason. I find it quicker to experiment with everything from melody,
harmony, lyrics, modulations to form when at the piano. Also I found
that I only make good tunes when playing and *singing* along.
I'm sure others have succeeded where I failed, but that how it works for
me.
12:08 p.m.
On 3/2/07, Dave Griffiths <dave(a)pawfal.org> wrote:
That sounds fascinating. I do have to say that the *best* music I've
ever created was written with a sequencer and lots of theory -
http://www.badmuthahubbard.com/haberdashery.mp3
- but it was harder. It was the only thing I wrote that semester.
Since then, I've gotten less and less adept at writing from theory.
-Chuckk
Chuckk Hubbard
wrote:
To present a totally different angle - I learnt all my musical theory
using a tracker (never having done any traditional music except
bellringing years ago), and now livecode all my music, which feels like
the most natural way to do it for me.
Livecoding also means I can create visuals and animation *at the same
time* as music - which is kind of a goal in itself for me.
Also linux is a really good environment for this kind of experimentation. I bet people's music would be far more
beautiful if they would sing
freely and often and then transcribe what they were singing, instead
of transcribing before the music even exists.
True!
I completely abandoned composing at the computer for exactly that
reason. I find it quicker to experiment with everything from melody,
harmony, lyrics, modulations to form when at the piano. Also I found
that I only make good tunes when playing and *singing* along.
I'm sure others have succeeded where I failed, but that how it works for
me. 
3 Mar
3 Mar
12:50 a.m.
RDM: love the acronym
yeah I had a big problem with trackers in that I would hear something
but have no means of birthing it, and once the loop was playing I would
be bound to what I was hearing. I have a similar problem with singing
though because I find I am thinking with my mouth and vocal chords. Of
course i've never composed anything of value. check out
muckvoid.googlepages.com for evidence.
Chuckk Hubbard wrote:
I've used very few trackers. I think I was turned
off that the
default is for all notes to be the same length, and that changing the
number of beats in any measure seemed kind of involved.
If you've never written music, and you don't own any instruments, and
you open a program for the first time that shows you 8 divisions per
measure with a steady beat, you'll probably make a lot of music before
you discover what other options are available. Multiply this by a
million users, and you've got the makings of a long-term association
with RDM (retarded dance music). Try entering Debussy into a tracker
and see how intuitive it is; and yet the music itself is very easy to
listen to.
I bet people's music would be far more beautiful if they would sing
freely and often and then transcribe what they were singing, instead
of transcribing before the music even exists. Or maybe it's just a
case where the number of people who write good music is less than the
number of people who write bad music in general?
On 2/28/07, Dave Phillips <dlphillips(a)woh.rr.com> wrote:
Greetings:
I have no idea if anyone's ever used a tracker to create a hit song, but
it is unfortunate that trackers are usually associated with a particular
style of music. I have heard some very cool stuff in module formats,
though I'll agree that most of the music-made-with-trackers that I've
heard tends towards rather uninteresting dance beat music. I don't
believe that trackers necessarily impose any kind of style restriction,
you can bend them into doing non-beat oriented stuff. Kuno's "Substantia
Grisea" is an excellent example.
Developers are often surprised at what users wind up doing with their
tools.
Trackers seem to have come along at a time just before cheap samplers
hit the market, which might have drawn attention away from the
developing tracker communities. Nevertheless, those communities remain
strong, a lot of people like to make music with trackers, and I don't
think they're overly concerned with their lack of popular success. ;)
Best,
dp
6545
days inactive
6552
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
24 comments
15 participants
participants (15)
-
Adam Sampson -
Atte André Jensen -
Chuckk Hubbard -
Dave Griffiths -
Dave Phillips -
david -
Esben Stien -
greg -
Ismael Valladolid Torres -
Lee Revell -
Leonard Ritter -
Louis Gorenfeld -
Nigel Henry -
Paul -
Rob