Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Wow, this guitar sounds so ultra-clean! Depending on song this could be pretty nice.

But the normal, "imperfect" guitar does not sound bad. I would also say, this "imperfection" gives a guitar its typical sound in the first place, so it's not a "problem".

Both guitars in that video are great, but indeed quite different.




The humanity is in the imperfections.

Prediction: society demotes all of the auto-tuning and AI art to training status, and actual art produced by himans with pulses is preferred.


Here we're not on the same page, frankly.

My favorite style of music (Psytrance) almost requires digital "perfection".

It's even not really possible to create a "properly sounding" Psytrance bass-line¹, not even a most basic variant, without doing some math (or using tools that will do that math for you). Frequencies, pitch, tempo, and phase need to match constantly and absolutely perfect, or it won't sound properly. Any "humanization" on any preset would kill the sound instantly!

For that reason creating Psytrance is a very "mechanical" task that only machines can perform with the required precision. (And not every machine is good enough for that actually. You need for example oscillators with very high precision or you will experience unwanted artifacts, especially on higher frequencies, that could destroy the sound).

Something that could create "perfectly matching" chords that don't include any dissonance would be really useful to get the (most of the time) desired "ultra-clean" Psytrance sounds. The usual alternative is to filter out all dissonance. But that's a lot of work, or in "bigger" chords or soundscapes outright impossible (even when you slice the sound in the frequency spectrum with all kind of tricks; filters also produce artifacts… And trying to get rid of those artifacts, like phase imperfections, changes the sound again in often undesired ways. A "perfect" tuning form the get go would maybe help with such things).

___

¹ Here two of the better tutorials for Psytrance bass-lines:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m40xkEkrEKo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4B1NcdNJjE

And if you're lazy see here for a VST plugin send form the gods:

https://fx23.net/psylab-pro/


A) thanks for intoducing something new

B) this is a subjective point, and one accepts your POV as valid

C) your POV may prove a minority one over time. Or not.


A) You're welcome! :-D

B), C)

I don't think all that electronic "magic" will go away anytime. It's more or less a prerequisite to create some kinds of sounds, which you just can't "manufacture".

It's not only about pure electronic music.

Almost all modern productions in all kinds of genres are depended on the usage of computers (and other machines). All that tech makes modern sounding peaces possible in the first place.

Even seemingly "maximal analog" music (like for example classic orchestra) sounds on a record the way it sounds because there was a lot of digital processing to remove all kinds of imperfections form the recorded raw audio, and of course a lot of of other post-processing.

Also I think it's clear what the majority prefers: People are asking actually for better produced pieces, otherwise the market wouldn't have moved that way.

Back in the day you would need to record and produce in one of that big, very expensive, well know studios somewhere around the world if you wanted to land a hit. The tech in those studios is worth millions to this day. Nobody would have invested in such a thing if people wouldn't have liked the results coming out there. (Today it's thankfully much cheaper to have a good recording; actually some small HW setup and a powerful PC with SW for only a few thousand bucks is more or less enough to sound absolutely professional, if you only know what you're doing of course).

On the other hand your actually right in some sense:

In a lot of genres "absolute perfection" isn't a goal. We use computers to remove "random (human / physical) imperfection" but add in on the other side some "humanization" into the sounds by digital means.

I think there is at the moment even a kind of trend to add more realistic, powerful, and interesting "humanization" possibilities to digital instruments. ("Humanization" or "randomization" knobs aren't anything new, but those functions get extended lately I think; for example you can use now AI instead of simply adding some randomness to some parameters).

So yes, we want to keep "natural" sounds to some degree. But by now we're using computers to artificially make the things that we're producing digitally sound more "natural". :-)

I think the core point here is control. To have something sound really great you need to be able to control every aspect of the sound, even the most tiny details. "Imperfections" are OK, or even actually desired, but only as long as they're added deliberately and remain controllable.




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: