What is this music? I need GENRE HELP

T

TheWithin

New member
Ok, so I'm posting mp3's everywhere, the thing is, I'm not sure what to call it when asked for genre so ANY and ALL suggestions are GREATLY appreciated!

AND BEFORE YOU GO without listening, you should know that you can STREAM all the tracks from my site with 1 click so check it out!

If you listen please comment, think of it as your thanks to me for sharing my delightful music :0

http://www.TheWithin.com/audio_gallery_A.shtml

oh, maybe I'll even upload a file here,
 
MISTERQCUE said:
Who is this!!??
Click to expand...

Well this is a forum for home recording musicians right!?

Well...(what the heck do you mean man!!!!!!!!!)

The artist is called TheWithin and TheWithin.com is an exposition of some of the multimedia work including tracks created in my bedroom.

I hope that answers your ? Now...hows about not phreaking and answer mine.

Thanks, (wierd)

TheWithin (oops, that's me!)
 
Shit, sorry home-boy! That post was for anutha' thread! Gotta'
'scooze me, I'm here at work bored outta' my GOT-D@mn mind!!
 
Listeninging to Niad right now... Now, In His House. Ok, now I'm listening to Visions.... Twinkle has quite an uplifting tempo!

New Age?

I have the same trouble as you! I have been influenced by the likes of: Vangellis, Kitaro, Pink Floyd, King Crimson, Steely Dan, and George Clinton (to name but a few.) With my primary instrument being a Yamaha Motif it's obviously very "electronic" but I like to squeeze as much organic sound out of it as I can.

All in all, I really enjoyed listening to your recordings. I like the blending of "nature" sounds you use in Niad. The recordings are pretty clean, but could probably benefit from "pro" mastering.

-Shaz
 
Hi, Thank you for your comments. I could use some studio moniters and that would improve my mix simply cause I could hear it then!. I'm learning about mastering, no master of it by any means...yet.

Please tell Yamaha that I need moniters, I just know they want me to have them! :-)
 
it's undeniable that good reference monitors are a major boon, especially to us rookies (I was truly amazed at the enhanced detail when I bought my Mackie HR 824's) but with patience and effort even us rookies can usually pull of a superb master.

The two most important things (in order, buy the way) I could recommend are:

1. Regardless if you have expensive studio monitors or even if you have to mix primarilly on headphones, find opportunities to listen to your CD's on as many systems as possible! (walkman, laptop PC, cheap heaphones, good heaphones, car stereo, HiFi stereo, club PA.. whatever you can get your hands on. Heck if you are truly hard-up, but live close to a good music store build a rapor with the manager or staff and you can probably test your mixes on their gear now and then.

2. I put this second mostly because it's abstract, and not as quantifiable as number one (at least not in the terms I know to use to convey it, my apologies.) Thry to think of your mix as living in 3 dimensions. I lost you already, didn't I? Well, try to stay with me here, and I'll go one step at a time (It's ok, even I have trouble understanding this.)

If you picture a "frame" of your song in 3-d, the 3 planes equate to the obvious "left and right" of any stereo recording, the "high and low" which is also a familiar concept to any audiophile, but finally, you also have "front and back" to make the third dimension. We all know that you control left and right with PAN, and that you control high and low with EQ. What is more likely to be a new concept is that front and back can be controlled with REVERB.

So, to put all that mumbo-jumbo together into a semblance of advice, you want to make apropriate use of the entire sonic "space" that you have to play around in. I'm afraid I can't really descibe what I'm getting at any better than that. The "astheics" of this sonic "space" or "palette" would best be described by a bonified musical or audio artis, not the likes of myself.

Bottom line: your tunes have a captivating and enjoyable quality. I bet with the proper mixdown that if you listened to the tracks through headphones or a good sound system that you could fall into an almost immediate meditation. That's why I'd call it "new age". Is there a "secular new age" category?

By the way, what instrument(s) are you using in these recordings?

-Shaz
 
Im going to sum this up.....

I like the mix, and the mastering....and this is called "New Age Instrumental"...

Good luck...
 
This is a long way from my area of expertise, but I'd have to agree with VOXVENDOR -- new age intrumental. Seems like a pretty easy call, especially for submitting to mp3 sites, since they rarely offer the category you'd like to place your songs under... (bastards) :mad:

J
http://www.30SoS.com
 
Thanks everyone, TheWithin.com is bigger than just myself and we appreciate your comments and input.

New age instrumental makes sense but is terribly broad. I've seen a category on some sites called symphonic electronica and some of our stuff is like that. We also have delightful kids music like 'Twinkle in your Eye'

Shazukura; loud and clear, thanks! I use a lot of soundfonts, my own .wavs and a couple of cheap programs along with a 99cent headset mic for vocal and sampling at this time. 'Poignant' is the term that we are looking for in our sound. One prominent intrument, especially with In His House, is the plucked string vst instrument by steinberg.
All the tracks were written by clicking the notes in and mixing with my wav's and then effects. Thanks for asking.

Missing an actual keyboard. I want a Korg Triton.

Shannon
TheWithin.com
 
Sorry Shazukura, Just a small nitpick by me,

You said,

""If you picture a "frame" of your song in 3-d, the 3 planes equate to the obvious "left and right" of any stereo recording, the "high and low" which is also a familiar concept to any audiophile, but finally, you also have "front and back" to make the third dimension. We all know that you control left and right with PAN, and that you control high and low with EQ. What is more likely to be a new concept is that front and back can be controlled with REVERB. ""


3D space is identifined as "left right" "front back" and (here's my little nitpick, he he) "top and bottom". Not high and low. Think about it. High and low is refering to frequencies not position. Reverb and stereo gives position but not eq.
Therfore to get true 3d sound, you need a stereo pair on the floor, a stereo pair on the ceiling, and reverb for the third axis - depth. And even then, only the left right, front back (reverb) will be audible to you. You'll only hear the top and bottom difference if your heads constantly moving. Its harder for us humans to hear top and bottom with our horrizontal pair of ears. Although we do percieve it somewhat because our heads are never exactly still.
So because of this, we humans can never have true 3d sound.

Unless we have 4 ears.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top