63 replies to this topic

[twistedkite]

Well, thanks guys! I've just emailed Clive and he fully acknowledges that comparing songs created in Garageband vs a professional studio leaves the former looking less than stellar. Clive's a big "headphones" guy--and really thinks they sound good over the old ipod...which I guess is how most music is heard nowadays anyway (because the radio plays shit!)

Sweden is always--always--welcome to share his views. I never mind criticism--especially arguments that are logical and valid. I try to rebute as best I can, but in the end "the drums are off, but I am what I am....yeahh, yeah, ...." (my kids love The Ascent of Man)

As for those lyric threads...believe me..I totally read them...it just got to the point where I didn't want to fight over stuff with two major REM fans and risk having hurt feelings. Arguing what Stipe says in the middle 8 for "Driver 8" would have left us all bruised!

Damn you Michael and your slurred deliveries that change from performance to performance! I've always found it irritating how quick Stipe is to dismiss his past singing [check his comments after Letter Never Sent in the Olympia CDs "I've moved on"] But maybe he does have a point....

As for the "project," having "real" drums is more of a possibility than re-doing the bass. I'm sure bluemookie has "skills" but it would be up to Clive if he wanted someone else to re-play his bass parts.

I know I keep repeating myself, but I can't wait to put up the first single (and subsequent songs) to really give you guys something to bitch, er, I mean "chew" over.

[welliwonder]

Lori, on 06 December 2011 - 05:36 AM, said:

The story posted said "All songs will be available for free download from Owenshire’s bandcamp page."  Nothing was said about selling cd's.

okay I got that wrong sorry

[welliwonder]

twistedkite, on 06 December 2011 - 06:30 AM, said:

As for Welliwonder's comments, I think I've addressed those in previous posts as well: Owenshire is a trio from Kitchener Ontatio fronted by me (I now live in London). I have a good 9 albums worth of demos. We have 2 studio albums, and an album of studio B-sides and remixes. I have another 7 albums of my own songs. I am NOT an REM cover band. I am my own singer-songwriter who loves REM and wanted to do a big project. The REM songs are NOT for sale--not only is that copyright infringement (even though I also know that merely covering a song and releasing for free is STILL copyright infringement, but to a lesser degree) I wouldn't dream of trying to make money off of someone else's music...I have no interest in that. Ideally all of my original songs would be up and in place before I "exposed" Remember Every Moment to such a wide audience...but it was not to be.

okay sorry , I got the wrong end of the stick completely , good luck with your stuff , particularly the original material.

[twistedkite]

Don't worry Welliwonder--I wasn't out to bust your chops; I just wanted to clarify my position. Anyway, murmursians, you've all been very patient. After spending the majority of yesterday filming and editing a promo clip for Ha (We Get Paid for It), I've decided to scrap it entirely because 1) it's just too much work, and 2) it's "okay" but not amazing...and my fragile ego couldn't bear another snarky comment from elkokolores.    (it'll go in the Owenshire vault with other somewhat half-baked experiments.)

Also, with a week approaching, I feel significant anticipation has been built up and that if I don't post something STAT I'll have squandered all of your goodwill and generosity. So, here's the deal: Hopefully by Thursday I will upload the song to my Youtube (along with an original Owenshire song too--no sense delaying that stuff either, not that I think any of you are greatly anticipating that part of all of this). I'll just use artwork as a static picture and let your minds do the hard imaginative work of crafting a video.

And, hey, if there are any budding filmmakers out there, by all means contact me about tossing together "fan made" clips for any or of this stuff...original songs included.

Anyway, as previously suggested/reported, I'll post our REM covers song by song at weekly or bi-weekly intervals in the Pop Songs thread. Of course, I'd love for each and every one of our covers to be Murmurs Front Page News, but I doubt this is possible, desirable, or even justifyable. If there's a moderator out there who wants to shift my posts because of a "slow news day" or week, or month, well cool.

I'm just thankful for so much interest. I mean, over 1100 views is flattering...even if half of them are bots. Kidding! Stay tuned for the post...and hopefully you don't think the song(s) suck.

[Sweden]

Cool, look forward to hearing the first one in full.

[thomas08]

really cannot wait to hear this!

the way i see it is that if you have the ability to create a drum beat in garageband from scratch using the same beat as bill berry used then you're more than capable of tweeking the sound to replicate Bill's sound, it will be fine

when i record my songs for the first time i always, always use a drum machine, then when im happy with what ive recorded i get the drummer to do proper drums. both versions always sound great.

I'm just happy that someone here has actually taken the initiative to record an REM covers album! and if that means using artificial drum beats then its a price im willing to pay

[Sweden]

thomas08, on 07 December 2011 - 11:07 AM, said:

the way i see it is that if you have the ability to create a drum beat in garageband from scratch using the same beat as bill berry used then you're more than capable of tweeking the sound to replicate Bill's sound, it will be fine

GAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!!!!



I assume you are suggesting they might as well release midi versions of the songs instead, they also use the "same beat" (whatever the hell that means) and replicate sound.

If he wasn't such a nice guy, Bill would go after you with his tractor. He'd certainly have every right in the world to do so.

[thomas08]

Look this thread has 46 replies and not one of them mentioned anything about how shit drum machines are until you brought it up, they didn't even notice it! So to me, if that many people can listen to a trailer and not find a problem with the drums then its obviously not as big a problem as you're making it out to be.

And of course I'm not suggesting that?? There's a big difference between drums on midi tracks and the ones created in garageband. Anyone can tell a midi track has fake drums but it's a lot harder to distinguish between the two on garage band (as we saw in this thread). And same beat, well I don't really know how to dumb that down any further so...

If this whole "programmed drums" thing is going to ruin the listening experience for you then the obvious answer is don't listen. Otherwise just be grateful that someone's actually putting their time into this project.

[Lori]

Yeah I didn't notice that the drum machine was apparently shit.  I listen to all kinds of music including hip hop and rap machine beats so maybe I'm just used to it.  It's ashame that twistedkite has scrapped the project.  I was looking forward to Sweden's drumming contribution and expecting to hear something really exceptional.  Oh well.

[Sweden]

thomas08, on 08 December 2011 - 03:39 AM, said:

Look this thread has 46 replies and not one of them mentioned anything about how shit drum machines are until you brought it up, they didn't even notice it! So to me, if that many people can listen to a trailer and not find a problem with the drums then its obviously not as big a problem as you're making it out to be.

That in itself is a pretty massive problem. If you start suggesting that drums are possible to replace by Garage Band drum tracks, then certainly you could just as easily replace bass grooves in the same way. Certainly the people ignorant about the drums would be just as ignorant about the bass if it had been created the same way. What's the next step?

Again, while I both understand and disagree with the "Owenshire" decision to use programmed drums, the reaction from the people around makes me deplore what appears to be the general view on music (and perhaps drumming in particular) around here... And it certainly strongly discounts any appreciative comments about Bill that we hear around here, and that's sad in itself.

And in terms iof Lori's comments, it's just stupid to suggest that I said the drum machine sounded shit. Comments about hip hop etc. just show that you're missing the entire point (which in itself is a bit of an achievement).

And to avoid further stupid comments, I for the fourth time repeat that I do look forward to hearing this stuff, and I applaud the project as such. I strongly disagree with an obvious aspect of it, but that's another aspect.

/D

[thomas08]

Sweden, on 08 December 2011 - 04:45 AM, said:

That in itself is a pretty massive problem. If you start suggesting that drums are possible to replace by Garage Band drum tracks, then certainly you could just as easily replace bass grooves in the same way. Certainly the people ignorant about the drums would be just as ignorant about the bass if it had been created the same way. What's the next step?

That's an entirely different situation. Using a template bass groove would be horrible as it would remove a massive element of the songs, but Owenshire aren't using template drum beats. In garageband you can create drum beats from scratch. I've created the orange crush drumbeat for myself to try it out and it sounds pretty good. So it's nothing like using bass grooves because no template could match Bill's drums, hence the reason they won't be using templates...

Sweden, on 08 December 2011 - 04:45 AM, said:

And to avoid further stupid comments, I for the fourth time repeat that I do look forward to hearing this stuff, and I applaud the project as such. I strongly disagree with an obvious aspect of it, but that's another aspect.

Well at the moment that obvious aspect is still there so take it or leave it. I for one would rather a covers project with a drum machine than no covers project at all.

The fact that you'd actually call a post with an opinion differing to yours as "stupid" says a lot I think...

[twistedkite]

Great God! Chill people! Chill! Here is my final post on the matter:

1) I have a mixed opinion on the drums in garage band. In particular I find the cymbal crashes artificial; however, on some of these cover songs the drums actual do sound "great" or, um, "good" (or "tolerable" if you're Sweden ) . Or let's say "good enough." Yeah. I'm willing to accept that to achieve a "life goal."

2) In Sweden's defense, comparing programmed or artificial drums in rap, hip-hop, or even in my beloved Nine Inch Nails (I love you Trent!) to programmed drums in a song that is a faithful cover of a rock song is a bit of a false analogy---in one genre, it's "okay" if the drums sound artificial..that's the point. However, I can understand how someone could find "artificial" drums found in a song that is "faithfully" covering a rock song with real drums a bit of a turn off. Remember: it's not like I'm some industrial band covering traditional rock songs. Quite the opposite--we're a "indie/alt rock" band covering an "indie/alt rock" band. Similarity was key.

Anyway, I find this all rather hilarious because I know that when the rest of the covers appear people will simultaneously say "they're too close to the originals!" and then in the same breath say "hey, but you totally said the wrong word here! And Mike doesn't play that note! And you added that extra harmony!"--thereby completely dismissing the fact that, yes, variations are certainly allowed because they are COVERS! They are not identical songs! And thus we have the paradox of the "faithful" cover song: make it too close to the original, and everybody whines that you didn't "make it your own," (with nobody acknowledging that sometimes "making it your own" makes the song sound like shit!). on the other hand, add even the subtlest change and people berate you for not sticking to the original. *sigh*

But I'm cool with all of this.

Thomas08--thanks for the encouragement
Lori--thanks for the encouragement too---please know that I/we ARE NOT scrapping the project. We will do our 40 songs (and Clive has an acoustic REM albums he wants me to sing over too). And I know for a fact that there will be additional outtakes, variations, and maybe even a few more "Owenshire-y" sounding covers where I let loose and all of you can turn your noses up and say "Yikes! Stick to the faithful covers!" But that's all part of the fun.
Sweden: I totally get your points--it's all good.

As for the rest of you, please head on over to the Pop Songs thread and check out Ha (We Get Paid For It).  

[Sweden]

As I posted in the other thread, I really like the first song released. Still though...

thomas08, on 08 December 2011 - 06:01 AM, said:

That's an entirely different situation. Using a template bass groove would be horrible as it would remove a massive element of the songs, but Owenshire aren't using template drum beats. In garageband you can create drum beats from scratch. I've created the orange crush drumbeat for myself to try it out and it sounds pretty good. So it's nothing like using bass grooves because no template could match Bill's drums, hence the reason they won't be using templates...

You do realize there's more to drumming than "patterns", right? Apart from slightly artifical sounds, as twistedkitemike mentions himself, you also have the whole aspect of dynamics, velocity of hits, variations of where on the skin you hit a drum, tempo changes, etc. Minor details, but together they are a huge part of the sound and feel of the song, which is what I have been trying to point out along. By your reasoning above, a bass line which note by note corresponds to what Mike plays would be perfectly fine if created through Garage Band or something similar. I disagree, just like I do in terms of the drums.

Well at the moment that obvious aspect is still there so take it or leave it. I for one would rather a covers project with a drum machine than no covers project at all.

Quote

The fact that you'd actually call a post with an opinion differing to yours as "stupid" says a lot I think...

To refer to hip hop drums for comparison, or claim that I argued that the programmed drums sounded shit, is actually stupid.

[twistedkite]

Sweden! Did you just call me twistedkitemike? I'm Twistedkite! The original!
Anyway, as far as saying you'd rather have a "covers project with artificial drums than none at all"...I consider that high praise..or rather some form of validation..and that means a lot. Honest.

I'm loathe to call myself a muscian--pretentious nonsense, particularly from someone in my position--but I have been in the studio and obviously played in bands with real drummers, so I can fully acknowledge that there is more to drumming than merely replicating beats. I mean, there's a reason why people say a drummer has a particular style. Hell, in the new issue of Rolling Stone which counts down the "best" guitarists ever, many of the write-up say "I play 'so and so's' notes, but I just can't sound like him!'

Originally in my above post I mentioned something about Clive replicating the beats exactly, but after listening to the REM version of HA and ours, it's clear that some fills were dropped--and Bill's drumming OBVIOUSLY has more power, urgency, and heart. He's William T Berry!

Anyway, I say this with all sincerity and naivete: it would be nice if the song(s) can be judged on its own merits rather than compared to the REM versions in every single way. Of course, REM themselves have expressed the same wish regarding letting their newer songs stand on their own instead of constantly being compared to their back catalogue...but good luck with that!

If REM can't muster that kind of concession on this board (or in the world at large), there's no way in hell that we will

[Sweden]

Haha, sorry about the name mixup!
And thanks for actually understanding my points about the drumming aspects. You're probably the only one, but one the other hand your understanding is what I was aiming at.

[Southern Gothic NC]

Nice! Good luck on your project and I'm looking forward to hearing it all.

[Lori]

Sweden, on 08 December 2011 - 08:08 AM, said:

To refer to hip hop drums for comparison, or claim that I argued that the programmed drums sounded shit, is actually stupid.

I wasn't comparing David, just saying that I'm used to electronic drum sounds so they don't bother me.  You said it was crap that twistedkite used them.  It gets to me that you find fault around here but continue to prop yourself up like a big know all.  That's why I'd be interested to hear some of your playing genius because all you seem to do around here is talk.

[Sweden]

Lori, on 08 December 2011 - 06:30 PM, said:

I wasn't comparing David, just saying that I'm used to electronic drum sounds so they don't bother me.  You said it was crap that twistedkite used them.  It gets to me that you find fault around here but continue to prop yourself up like a big know all.  That's why I'd be interested to hear some of your playing genius because all you seem to do around here is talk.

Yeah, yeah, yeah...I said it was crap that he used them, even though I expressed it in a slightly more elaboprated fashion. I never said they sounded shit, which is what you claimed I had said. See the difference?

You also said that "hey, they use electronic drums in hip hop and rap, so I don't see why using them here would be wrong", which I maintain is a completely incorrect and, if you will, stupid conclusion.

As for knowing it all, well...if people here claim they do not see the issue with using such drums, and talk about how "one can recreate the beat Bill played in Garage Band anyway", well, then we certainly have different views and appreciation for, and perhaps knowledge of, drumming.

I won't even comment on "playing genius" because again that's just a cheap shot which has no relevance to the points I made (which, again, Mr. Owenshire has grasped and generally agreed with).

/D

[Sweet Fanny Addams]

I really like the idea of your project and the sound you've gotten on the clips I've heard. One question though-- and it's not meant in any snarky way but just for clarification-- do you have to pay royalties for the songs? I ask because someone I know is a brilliant filmmaker, but feels stymied regarding how to access music he can use without having to pay royalties. There are sites that have bought copyright ownership of published songs and  sell that music, and there are a few places that are "free" libraries where you can download and use  music free of charge, but most of it is muzak, and more or less, well, shit.
REM, specifically are published under nightgarden music, and temporary music if I'm not mistaken. How hard/easy is it to put together copyright owned music without running the risk of breaking the law?
For example you said here:
"variations are certainly allowed because they are COVERS!"

Is that a legal detail or a purely creative one?
Thanks, and do let me know when your album will be available!

[twistedkite]

I'll answer the last part first: when the trailer (or anywhere else) mentions the project done/released in 2013, that was meant purely as an arbitrary date, but one far enough in the future that seemed "about right." Please remember that the original idea was to let the REM community know about the project on Murmurs.com (done) and get excited about it (done) before the site shut down on Dec 31 (not happening anymore).

Since Murmurs.com will go on, Clive and I have decided to post our covers at bi-weekly intervals on my Owenshire Youtube page (with new threads started for each song in the Pop Songs forum on this site). It made no sense to us to tease the REM community with a trailer and then offer nothing for 2 whole years!

BUT, and here's the big butt, we are reluctant to make any of the songs available for download UNTIL we are completely done. The reason is simple: we want all of them to be mastered at the same volume level. And, additionally, we aren't really completely sure which 40 will be included on the "final" final tracklist. In short, you guys truly are seeing this thing as it's being thrown together.

I'm aware some people can rip the audio from Youtube videos, and that's fine---hell, if I loved a song well enough, I'd do it too--but, for those of you that are curious, I don't plan on posting the finished tracks/tracklist to my Bandcamp page until they are all done, sequenced, and mastered at the same level. Then we will post the lossless Wavs for all to have for free.

Okay, on to point 2: Royalties.

At one point I read the "indie band survival guide" which mentioned something about royalties and cover songs. In that book I was surprised to read that you owe a band something like 6cents for every song you cover of theirs---even if you give it away for free. So, yeah, Clive and I owe REM something like $2.40 for doing our project...which I'll gladly pay! No joke. Anyway, that is for a cover song where the cover artist makes NO money from the project.

BUT, when you plan to sell or make money from your cover songs, well, that is when other legalities like artist royalties, publishing royalties, and performance royalties all come into play--stuff, again, I don't know much about.

It's funny that you mentioned your example about using music in films for independent artists since I also read about this in that Indie Band Survival Guide...something about a website where indie artists upload stuff to be used in other creative projects royalty free. I mean, let's use my own original music as an example: for those of you who have visited the actual Owenshire channel on Youtube, I have uploaded a bunch of original songs--I've done this simply for exposure (knowing full well no one is going to pay money for a song from a band they've never heard of) Anyway, since I own all of my music, I would have no problem loaning it out to other artists for their projects (ie: films) as long as no money was being made. Most of the "copyright" attached to my own stuff is creative commons usage.

As for my quote of "variations are certainly allowed because they are COVERS"--I meant this purely artistically, meaning, I don't want people freaking out because I sing a lyric differently than Stipe, or because Clive's guitar doesn't sound exactly like Buck's or something. This was me just reminding everybody that they are COVER songs at heart, no matter how close to REM's versions they sound.  

Legally, it wouldn't matter if an artist did a cover song and changed it slightly from the original--if he/she tried to make money from it without going through the proper legal channels, it would still be copyright infringement. I don't need a lawyer to tell me that!

And thanks for the compliments by the way.