Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length


Re: Theory
August 08, 2008, 03:01:02 AM
Robert Fripp has been very successful in terms of developing atmosphere throughout his soundscapes through the use of nothing more than a guitar and processing equipment.  But we could be talking about two completely different things given how vague some of this terminology is.

Agreed that can be done.  I was responding to the idea that a "riff"/motif could be played soft to loud (or whatever) and have an effect.  Altering the applied processing changes the colour, but would be going beyond the simple "dymanic" change that was implied would emphasize atmosphere by itself -- something I've certainly not heard in metal in any meaningful way that I can remember.

Though (to reply to the second person)  I don't think it is quite as simple as that.  I agree that the notion "dynamics" has been changed, which was more or less what I was trying to imply.

Just out of curiosity, how well does this (reliance on effect) carry over to live performances?  The prospect of distorting and effecting your way through recordings seems simple enough...how much does it matter if we are discussing performance rather than recording?

Re: Theory
August 08, 2008, 10:26:47 AM
With a couple of different setups prepared a head of time (which most bands do anyway - on the last tour, I noticed Tom Fischer used three different guitars during Celtic Frost's set, and it was obvious each had a different equipment rig that it was being run through), it shouldn't be all that difficult.  I imagine an enterprising musician could come up with a basically unlimited array of effects by running things through a laptop the way Karl Sanders did with Nile's samples: this is one area in which technology, for once, is potentially more useful than harmful.