haze015
-
Posts
13,615 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Events
Articles
Store
Downloads
Posts posted by haze015
-
-
Always good to hear real music on this forum ^^^
At least with Showbiz and Origin of Symmetry, I could sort of hear where they were coming from, but you have to remember that by that point, Radiohead was long past the OK Computer era and had moved on to weird electronic music, becoming mostly just the Thom Yorke show, so if Radiohead wasn't going to give us rock, then why not have Muse take over? (Especially since by Absolution, the Radiohead influences were practically invisible.)Radiohead is very much all members, far from the Thom Yorke show. Also Johnny Greenwood 'solo' stuff is far weirder than anything put out by Radiohead, who are far from 'weird electronic music', more radio-friendly versions of Warp Records stuff at their weirdest.
-
The British are notorious for knocking down anyone who becomes very famous. Craig David and James Blunt are two highly talented musicians it became fashionable to hate. I think it's the same with Muse. I don't know whether this happens on other countries.
Who hates Craig David!?
James Blunt is a loveable cunt though.
The UK doesn't hate people who become famous, we tend to hate commercialisation and 'establishment', which sadly often goes hand in hand with success.
-
A fair enough assessment, though I was less talking about whether or not they could pull off the sound and more about the fears that the whole album would be a dubstep album, which were sparked by Muse's decision to troll us all by having the album's teaser only feature the dubstep song. Because really, the album is more of a symphonic-progressive-dubstep-disco-piano-driven-ballad-pop-hard-metal genre roulette, and Matt did warn us with his assessment of it being "christian gangsta rap jazz odyssey, with some ambient rebellious dubstep and face-melting metal flamenco cowboy psychedelia."
There wasn't any Dubstep on that album, just elements of tacky commercial dance as they were jumping on the bandwagon, like everyone else was.
Their teaser was probably the closest Muse have been to originality in a long time. If it had actually been full of that, it might have been half decent, at least interesting rather than yet another collection of weak pastiches of a variety of genres done far better by plenty of others.
-
Because they turned shit years ago.
They're racist against British people.How can anyone be racist against British people?
-
If you've got to weigh up feel vs sound, then consider leaning towards feel, because MIDI/USB means you can control sound modules, samplers, VSTs etc.
-
Unmistakable toan. I think the mega distortion is for the not as high gain sound (need to rewatch the episode of That Pedal Show with his rig to check).
...fox hat?
I'd be surprised if it was for low gain sounds, although it is weirdly cool to set the gain low on one, tone and low end right up, neck pickup for a fat as fuck, yet attacking tone.
Either its for any of his Strats that might be thinner sounding or solos. It is a similar pedal to the MT2, just a different approach to tone/EQ.
-
How is it? Definitely on the list for when I completely redo my board.
Oh its lovely.
Its replacing an RV6, which is probably a better choice if all the options of the Big Sky aren't necessary in all honesty. Only issues I've had so far is that it doesn't seem to switch very cleanly* and I wish the gated reverb was trashier, but Lexicon have that nailed.
*Though I'm intending to use it on an aux send on a mixer.
-
Nice. Still really want one of them.
Just arrived.
-
To be honest i have no idea what the 45 is, which makes this seem like a good idea, because it includes all the flagship phasers to try out.
Its a lighter version of the Phase 90. 2-stage rather than 4-stage. Good for more subtle uses.
Its not all the options though, the Phase 100 differs from both. But decent idea idea for a pedal though.
Just bought a Big Sky, so expect dodgy Shoegaze/Ambient from me from now on.
-
It doesn't need justifying. "I want to" is perfectly legitimate reasoning.
Well yeah, but if someone has to ask...
Absolutely not! It's all purely for self indulgence. And when I'm in venues I'm either behind the desk or side of stage rather than performing. I've just always liked the idea of building a full rack mounted guitar rig, just for shits and gigsThat's fair enough. If its something you'd like to do, then go for it.
You can get the FCB1010 for £90. Might be a cheap way into this sort of setup: https://www.bax-shop.co.uk/foot-switch/behringer-fcb1010-midi-foot-switch?gclid=CNXN7_PwptACFfQK0wodQq8FVQ
-
I am unsure whether to get the Kemper Remote or some other MIDI footswitch (liquid pro because I am Muse fanboi, but not rich enough for the mastermind).
Kemper is cheaper, works straight off with the Kemper (obviously). However if I ever decide to delve more into a whole rack of shit and want to control other shit by MIDI, aka Whammy then the Kemper Remote cannae do that
Do you really need to control a Whammy by MIDI?
If you haven't got any other gear with MIDI, then it seems kind of pointless to worry about it as its very much a full on pro-thing anyway. Finely tuned-presets and immediate switching doesn't matter much in poor sounding small venues.
-
I just don't know how to respond to this
Just move it from where its placed, that sometimes stops it from picking up radio stations. Or lowering the Drive and upping the Gate.
-
A Keeley Compressor (what is it for anyway?)
Compressing
-
Oh right, might try that next time I'm fiddling with the copicat.
Has anyone got tips for micing up an amp? I'm using a blue snowball (probably not the best mic to use for this but it'll do for now) set to cardioid and it's about 3 feet away from the amp and roughly facing the middle of the speaker, but it always sounds a bit harsh when playing stuff back.
Its worth doing!
Angle the microphone based on where you listen to it from. Check the frequency response as well, if it has a bass roll-off to counteract proximity effect, then get it up close.
-
True, probably more annoying than the size of the thing or the tape loops breaking.
You mean using one with a delay pedal? Haven't tried that yet.
No, basically setting it up on an aux channel and as I only have the one, record one side, then the other with the same settings. Although using a different delay pedal on the Dry/Reverb output could be interesting.
-
That's pretty amazing, just a shame using tape delay is a bit of a pain in the arse.
Its more that its kinda addictive!
Turn it on for a bit of ambience, then all a sudden its 6 hours later and you didn't do whatever it was you intended to do.
Using it as a stereo delay is beyond gorgeous.
-
It's pretty amazing when you consider the price of the Kemper against the price of the Victory head.
Actually on the subject of impractical and expensive ways of doing things...
Recreating Sweep Delay from the DL4 with hardware:
-
It's pretty amazing when you consider the price of the Kemper against the price of the Victory head.
I think it shows that more money doesn't always equal better.
-
I love this video. I was thinking of saving up for a good amp, but after watching this I think I'll just save up for a Kemper somewhere down the road. There'll be lots of moving for me in the foreseeable future too, so I'm glad amp modelling has gotten this good
Effects, on the other hand...
The FFF made me suddenly want to own a pedal board If they released it as software, that'd be awesome.
From moving around a fair bit, it doesn't seem like a better option tbh. Might be good for cutting down a multiple amp setup or just as something to avoid taking expensive/collectable amps out, but really a good amp and a decent pedalboard is capable of any genre.
-
Couldn't tell the difference at all either. Kempers are seriously impressive. All of the want.
Got the first one right, second wrong. Like with the second the Kemper sounded better and cleaned up nicer, the real thing sounded kind of horrible.
Always done so well on their comparisons as well. Screw you Kemper!
-
I didn't say the music industry peaked in the sixties. I wasn't intending to compare the sixties to today but I should have quoted the post to which I was responding which mentioned how many albums sixties and seventies artists released and how frequently they released them in comparison to the number of albums which are released by current artists.
When I said that a lot of artists in the sixties were badly treated by their management, of course I wasn't referring to the big, successful bands. If they had been defrauded, they might not have become big and successful. The Zombies, for example, just didn't catch on in the UK and only really became big in the USA after they had split up. Only the songwriters did well out of their sixties success; the rest were broke. I'm sure the same thing happens now but I'm guessing artists are more savvy than they were back then.
Plenty of broke musicians around today!
Whether or not 60's musicians were screwed over had nothing to do with their success.
The point about album releases is that it is artificially slow these days. Slowing it down further, especially with less material doesn't make much sense, as what has to be recouped from it has to be far greater (Or touring would have to be more intense to make up for it!). Labels don't want bands in studios night & day as its expensive, always been like that, but need them in there often enough to have something to sell, its about balance.
Plenty of musicians could put out material at the sort of rate artists used to.
Always loved this by Soulwax, as one of the members convinced PIAS to pay for them to record in a NY studio, just so he could visit his girlfriend.
-
A lot more people bought records in the sixties than people buy recorded music now because there was no other way to hear it other than to buy records or wait until it was played on the radio. Radios weren't as sophisticated so the sound was bloody awful (I'm old enough to remember.) Artists had to sell an astonishing amount of singles to get into the charts. I thought Prince was very clever giving copies of one of his albums to people who bought tickets to see his live shows. Do I remember rightly that people knew in advance? I was a bit annoyed that Muse didn't tell us they were going to do that this time but, actually, it was pretty clever of them. Those of us who had bought the album before we bought the tickets now had a spare album we could give to someone who hadn't bought it. That person might now want to buy more Muse albums and see them live so they have increased their fanbase. On the other hand, some fans found the price of tickets for the shows very expensive and probably would have preferred no 'free' album and a cheaper ticket for the gig. There was pressure on artists in the sixties to release albums and singles very frequently. A lot of them were badly served by their managers and many were defrauded so, as artists took charge of their careers, they were better able to do what they wanted, at least, the ones who were established and popular and were in a position to stand up to the suits.
There is quite a lot wrong in this.
We can't realistically compare the sixties to today, as how people consume music is very different now and has changed throughout the decades. The music industry didn't peak in the 60's at all.
Your last paragraph is mostly nonsense, plenty of musicians are screwed over in all sorts of different ways. Large successful bands got away with more in the 60's & 70's than they do today. The bands who make a stand are the DIY/Indie types, not the Muse's or Radiohead's of this world (Regardless of however much Thom Yorke pretends)
-
True, but in that case it's mostly a collection of songs which they wrote in the 90s but didn't record at the time. But yeah they did write a lot more in the early 00s. And it's not like their quality control has gotten better.
Well there was a bit more to it than that, between OOS and Absolution there was a change in the definition of what a 'single' was, forcing less B-sides, so the EP/Mini-album length releases that were common didn't count as singles anymore.
So less recorded material was required for album cycles. The shift to downloads meant less was required as well.
-
I've been thinking about this thing with the rate at which artists are releasing music, and it's interesting how things have changed. Muse put out 10-12 songs every 3 years, Radiohead even less. In fact, most popular rock bands these days seem to take about 2-4 years between albums.
But if we go back a few decades, The Beatles released 12 albums in 7 years (much shorter albums ofc). Queen released 15 albums in 22 years, Depeche Mode released 7 albums in their first 9 years.
In comparison, Muse have released 7 albums in 16 years.
Another thing to consider is non-album singles/EPs and B-sides. The amount released during Showbiz & OOS is likely more than Muse have done in the last 10 years.
The FFF made me suddenly want to own a pedal board 
Album Eight: Simulation Theory
in Songs & Releases
Posted
Plenty of people did, its similarities to Brostep caused a lot of people to have this idea they were doing a Dubstep album.