Hip Hop Artists Developing Open Source Beat Making Software

Nice Idea by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 03:15 · Score: 5, Funny

But Hip Hop artists just pirate whatever software they need. The only real expense are decent microphones, mixers, preamps and speakers.

full disclosure: I am a sound engineer living in NC who works with hiphop artists.

Re:Nice Idea by ackthpt · 2012-06-26 03:19 · Score: 1, Interesting

But Hip Hop artists just pirate whatever software they need. The only real expense are decent microphones, mixers, preamps and speakers.
full disclosure: I am a sound engineer living in NC who works with hiphop artists.
This.
Though their producers at least make some effort now to reduce their legal exposure by seeking the rights to the sample or knowing just how much they can get away with, rather than blatantly ripping off an drum track from another artist -- lest they end up in court coughing up all of their profits.

--

A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Re:Nice Idea by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 03:20 · Score: 1, Insightful

I thought hip hop artists just ripped off other peoples beats?
Re:Nice Idea by ackthpt · 2012-06-26 03:36 · Score: 3, Funny

I thought hip hop artists just ripped off other peoples beats?
Honestly, they're the people, on the receiving end who most embody Marx's "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need", as they need beats, bass tracks, synth riffs, etc. But try to get them to pay for, or even credit the original artist, ah, that's where they become capitalists.

--

A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Re:Nice Idea by djlemma · 2012-06-26 04:17 · Score: 1

I think this is probably true of the entire target market of "beat making" software. Although the markets other than hip-hop won't necessarily bother with decent mics, because you don't need human vocals for techno/house/dubstep/whatever. Or any vocals at all, for that matter. People don't have to go out and record their own samples any more either since there's so many collections out there now.
Re:Nice Idea by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 05:16 · Score: 0

What's mine is mine. What's yours... We share.
Re:Nice Idea by cayenne8 · 2012-06-26 05:36 · Score: 1, Insightful

I guess actually learning to PLAY the drums and other instruments is totally out of the question, eh?
How in the world did we ever get musical beats....before computer software?
Hmm........

--
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Re:Nice Idea by cjjjer · 2012-06-26 05:51 · Score: 1

Pretty much sums up the reason for them wanting to do this :

One obstacle has been our software of choice, Reason 6. Not only is it prohibitively expensive, but it is difficult to order, impossible to share between computers, and is anchored by obnoxious security provisions.

In layman's terms they don't like the idea of not being able to use if for free. Pretty much defines the majority attitude in the hip hop industry really.
Re:Nice Idea by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 06:00 · Score: 0

a dozen tape players and a microphone in the middle of all of them
Re:Nice Idea by oldmac31310 · 2012-06-26 06:14 · Score: 4, Insightful

I'll get off your lawn. Yours is a really narrow minded view. The fact is, both 'real' musicians and people who can't play at all benefit greatly from the myriad of music software and hardware that have come along in the past 20 years. Using your logic (no pun intended) we should remove technology from music completely and go back to only using our voices, clapping our hands and banging rock and sticks. Think about a piano for example. It is a technological marvel. Should we ban it just because it makes it too easy and the musician doesn't even have to pluck or strike the strings? I consider myself a real musician and I am very happy indeed to make use of whatever tools are available.

--
http://www.acetonestudio.com
Re:Nice Idea by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 06:31 · Score: 0

Who wants a physical "real" drum set / live drums today anyway? Not all people hold on to what basically already our grandparents used in music production, or like rock music / related stuff. There's not much progress or discoverability left in such sounds. There are sounds that are more tiring to my ears than the standard bass, drums, piano, singer combo but how many bands fucked up nice tracks when they switched from electronic beats to drums...
Re:Nice Idea by logicassasin · 2012-06-26 06:54 · Score: 2

I thought hip hop artists just ripped off other peoples beats?
Honestly, they're the people, on the receiving end who most embody Marx's "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need", as they need beats, bass tracks, synth riffs, etc. But try to get them to pay for, or even credit the original artist, ah, that's where they become capitalists.
methinks you haven't paid attention to the liner notes of hip hop albums since the 80's. Sample clearance has become a lucrative stream of income for many a washed-up musician with catalogs that do nothing for them at the moment. They get credited and get paid for the samples all the time though there are some that simply won't allow it (Prince comes to mind).

--
Fifty watts per channel, baby cakes.
Re:Nice Idea by dgatwood · 2012-06-26 06:56 · Score: 1

A piano really isn't a technological marvel and never was. Even at the time, it was seen as a fairly straightforward improvement upon the harpsichord and the clavichord, the main difference between a piano and the latter being that the piece that strikes the string does not remain in contact with it. The mechanism was a definite improvement, but it was very much an incremental improvement over existing technology, the fundamentals of which are merely a more modern version of the hammered dulcimer/santur, which dates back roughly the time when Christianity was founded, coupled with a keyboard that evolved (over the centuries) from the pipe organ/hydraulis, which dates back to roughly the 3rd century B.C.
In fact, until the last century, all modern musical instruments are fairly easy to trace back in concept to something that existed at or before the time of Christ. That's why electronic music is so shocking; it is really the first major revolutionary jump in music production in thousands of years. It makes previous major jumps (e.g. the first valved horn in the early 1800s) look almost microscopic by comparison. It is no surprise to see a fair number of people conclude that it is too new—too different.

--
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
Re:Nice Idea by VortexCortex · 2012-06-26 07:18 · Score: 1

You can't shut off your ears, and they're connected directly to your brain. Unlike other art forms where people direct their attention at what they want to absorb, the waveforms you see in music are already recreated inside your brain before you begin appreciating them.
I think you're hung up on the distinction between musicians and composers.
Musicians play music. Composers use instruments to play people.
One can be both.
Re:Nice Idea by cupantae · 2012-06-26 07:29 · Score: 1

"Technology" generally refers to this kind of product of incremental advancements. I enjoyed the little spiel, but all you didn't do was demonstrate your point.

--
--
Re:Nice Idea by dgatwood · 2012-06-26 10:57 · Score: 2

What you're missing is that electronic synthesis is an incremental advancement relative to other computer technology and to some extent relative to audio recording technology, but it is not an incremental advancement relative to other musical instrument technology. It is an entirely different way of producing sound that pretty much spontaneously appeared in the past century out of nowhere.
For tens of thousands of years, musical instruments produced sounds because of a player striking something, plucking something, or blowing air over or through a tube (sometimes involving a reed or human lips simulating a reed) in some fashion. Each change was a small, incremental improvement in the way you do one of those things. The only thing that electronic synthesis has in common with previous musical instruments is that something vibrates (which is basically a fundamental requirement for creating sound).

--
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
Re:Nice Idea by TheoMurpse · 2012-06-26 12:47 · Score: 2

Yeah, that no-talent hack Mozart had the audacity to write music for scores of instruments he didn't know how to play!
Re:Nice Idea by Taco+Cowboy · 2012-06-26 13:21 · Score: 1

For tens of thousands of years, musical instruments produced sounds because of a player striking something, plucking something, or blowing air over or through a tube (sometimes involving a reed or human lips simulating a reed) in some fashion.
I honestly think you may have been overlooked a critical thing
We are talking about "music", right?
Since the dawn of homonoid civilization, where-ever "music" was played, it was played live
The presenters and audiences were all gathered at the same spot, so to share, or add to, the soundwaves that were at that place
Since the beginning of sound-recording, the advent of (wireless) radio-transmission of sound-recording, this thing we refer as "music" had already been changed
The digitalization of the soundwave (including "music") - and the creation of gadgets like "beat machines" - is but another rotation of that giant wheel of human innovation that had been keeping going forward, and will keep on going forward until God knows when
Just my 2-cents

--
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
Re:Nice Idea by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 13:57 · Score: 0

If you understand the domain, you'd see these same incremental changes from existing instruments. Take an additive synthesizer for example, which creates a sound by building up harmonic content using oscillators. Sounds complex and futuristic, but this is exactly how drawbars on an organ work. There's nothing magical about synths, they just generate and modulate sound like any other instrument. Hell, 3/4 of a synth could basically be built from guitar pedals.
I think what most people have a problem with is sequencing, programming and the automation side of things. There is a difference between musician and instrumentalist, and not everyone wants to be both. I have friends who learned guitar just to play covers (and some really well), and have no idea of music theory. Who cares?
Re:Nice Idea by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 14:15 · Score: 0

People like you are like those who dismissed the impressionist's work.
Musicians have been playing physical instruments for the last four thousand years. I think it's time to move on.
Re:Nice Idea by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 15:30 · Score: 0

This what? You didn't finish your first sentence.
Re:Nice Idea by cupantae · 2012-06-27 07:10 · Score: 1

I don't think that's a meaningful difference in terms of invention. Hearing a simple oscillator, even the most casual musician would surely realise an instrument could be made from it. A lot of ingenuity went into the designs from that point, but again, it was a gradual evolution of ideas.

--
--

Please Define by CanHasDIY · 2012-06-26 03:21 · Score: 3, Interesting

"Beat making software."

FWIW, Hydrogen is free.

--
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese

Re:Please Define by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 03:24 · Score: 4, Informative

Hydrogen is not a pro level piece of software. We tried it, and ended up hiring a drummer instead.
The results are far superior, at least for our style of music.
Re:Please Define by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 03:25 · Score: 1

Also, LMMS.
Re:Please Define by gl4ss · 2012-06-26 03:26 · Score: 1

tracker.
what I assume is that they're after is a tracker/voice generator coded by them that they somehow get paid to produce.
anyhow, if you can afford a fucking nintendo ds you can afford a beat making thingy.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GjUy8C4iqPM
but really wtf, they should import some demoscene over there, they got booty & drugs - shouldn't be too hard to coerce people to visit.

--
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Re:Please Define by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 03:35 · Score: 0, Troll

Fruity Loops.
I'm not even kidding either. It started out as a toy and has evolved into a multi-featured medium-end DAW and is popular among the hip hop community. It's easier to figure out than real products like Cubase or Ableton, which helps it appeal to the hip hop crowd where the most intelligent songs sound like "I'm a big n*gg*r and I like to fuck bitches".
Re:Please Define by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 03:42 · Score: 0

You are so damned ignorant and racist, it's ridiculous.
Re:Please Define by Kozar_The_Malignant · 2012-06-26 03:44 · Score: 0

In my opinion, a live musician is always preferable to a robot. Rhythm software/drum machines have been around since the 60's at least. Human is better.

--
Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
Re:Please Define by amliebsch · 2012-06-26 03:45 · Score: 1

It's FL Studio now, but yeah, it's amazing how powerful it's become. Oh and by the way, free updates for life! Though they do sell harder/better/faster/stronger plugins as well.

--
If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
Re:Please Define by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 03:49 · Score: 0

Have you ever listened to 50 Cent? I think that explains it all.
Re:Please Define by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 04:02 · Score: 0

You're missing the important element for selling hip hop - the arrogant thug-life frontman. Without that attitude, you aint gonna sell shit.
Re:Please Define by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 04:07 · Score: 0

A drum machine can simulate a human by introducing timing errors. Machines excel at this kind of task, and never get tired.
Re:Please Define by mjwx · 2012-06-26 04:13 · Score: 2

You're missing the important element for selling hip hop - the arrogant thug-life frontman. Without that attitude, you aint gonna sell shit.
Arrogant and Thuggish enough for you?. Just got to program it to say "bitch" instead of "sir" when a person walks by.

Seriously though, we are going to see the emergence of "virtual pop stars" designed by committee to be appeal to as many people as possible appear in the next few years. Electronically produced music makes this goal a hell of a lot easier (a robotic arm that can play the guitar or piano as well as a human is probably a long way off).

--
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Re:Please Define by jsepeta · 2012-06-26 04:13 · Score: 1

FL Studio for iPad requires an expensive gizmo, but it's pretty full-featured for a tablet app.

--
Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
Re:Please Define by P-niiice · 2012-06-26 04:19 · Score: 1

Yes he's a huge artist selling millions of copies.

Stop speaking about what you know nothing about.
Re:Please Define by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 04:20 · Score: 1

"Hydrogen is not a pro level piece of software. We tried it, and ended up hiring a drummer instead."
Drummers are dangerous, especially if your amp goes to 11.
Re:Please Define by djlemma · 2012-06-26 04:21 · Score: 1

There's already software out there to automatically generate beats, or entire songs for that matter if you so desire. I've listened to the output, and it's crap. I love most of the genres you listed (not so into hip-hop though) but I'm not even all that picky about tracks, but the auto-generated stuff I've heard is worthless. But, don't let that discourage you from improving upon it! I imagine it won't get you as many girls as learning the guitar, though.
Re:Please Define by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 04:28 · Score: 0

When you consider autotune, there's already a lot of automation ;)
Re:Please Define by djlemma · 2012-06-26 04:30 · Score: 4, Informative

They are mostly talking about Reason. It's a software simulator for a bunch of real-life studio hardware that musicians used to have to purchase and hook up and find places to put. So, instead of having to spend $50,000 to outfit a studio with keyboards, synths, patch bays, mixers, effects, compressors, cables, etc., you can simulate it all with Reason for something like $450. But to the people in TFS, this is too much money still, and they would like to make a free equivalent. It's noble, but as others have mentioned there are other options that do not have nearly so polished and authentic sounds and interfaces, but are much cheaper or free.
Re:Please Define by X0563511 · 2012-06-26 04:31 · Score: 2

The difference between good hip-hop or electronic music and the bad stuff, is how much care and skill went into it's creation.
You can tell when something was made without any effort, or was automated. Unfortunately stupid teenagers seem to be deaf to the difference.

--
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
Re:Please Define by Stickerboy · 2012-06-26 04:49 · Score: 2

Seriously though, we are going to see the emergence of "virtual pop stars" designed by committee to be appeal to as many people as possible appear in the next few years. Electronically produced music makes this goal a hell of a lot easier (a robotic arm that can play the guitar or piano as well as a human is probably a long way off).
We already have them. Every single aspect of Justin Bieber / Britney Spears / Beyonce's projection in public life has been fabricated, test marketed, and refined down to the microscopic level. Every non-controversy, image makeover, life-changing interview and comeback has been preprogrammed to push the maximum number of buttons to gather the most attention and make the most profit for the entertainment industry celebrity complex. Why develop a computer program to be a virtual pop star when you have living breathing human beings that are more than willing to sell every aspect of themselves already to be one?

--
Light a fire for a man and he'll be warm for a day. Light a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
Re:Please Define by h4rr4r · 2012-06-26 04:50 · Score: 1

So is that beiber kid.
Both are design by committee "artists".
Re:Please Define by mcgrew · 2012-06-26 05:24 · Score: 1

The results are far superior, at least for our style of music.

A human is alwasy far superior, for any style of music (except maybe techno).

--
Free Martian Whores!
Re:Please Define by thomasw_lrd · 2012-06-26 05:27 · Score: 1

Cause you don't have to pay the program anything.

--
21st Century Renaissance Man
Re:Please Define by Megane · 2012-06-26 05:39 · Score: 4, Funny

I'll accept that when the machines can throw up like a real human drummer.

--
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
Re:Please Define by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 06:37 · Score: 0

Oh, here we have a nice example of the so-called "retro-oriented snarky rock hipster".
Disclaimer: i don't like most of hip hop (besides mostly French stuff), but i explicitely dislike obnoxious guitar freaks, that play the same boring sounds for decades now. Not much life left in your hand-crafted stuff, mate.
Re:Please Define by rk · 2012-06-26 06:56 · Score: 1

Pfft. Getting a robot to throw up is easy. Getting it to choke to death on vomit? That's where it gets hard.
Re:Please Define by rk · 2012-06-26 07:00 · Score: 1

There are programs that compose classical music that the average listener could probably not discern from the real thing, and I don't see many people seriously making the argument that Bach, Mozart and Beethoven didn't write "real" music.
Re:Please Define by n30na · 2012-06-26 07:11 · Score: 1

Well, there are already vocaloids. They were originally intended just for vocal synth, but they've basically become popular in their own right.
Re:Please Define by VortexCortex · 2012-06-26 07:22 · Score: 1

"Beat making software."
This just confirms my theory that "Hip Hop" is not a real form of music.
What do you think of Beethoven, Bach, and all the other composers of the world then?
Re:Please Define by Kozar_The_Malignant · 2012-06-26 09:05 · Score: 1

Is this why your girlfriend prefers a vibrator to whatever you bring?

--
Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
Re:Please Define by Gordonjcp · 2012-06-26 10:03 · Score: 0

You can automate them just as easily as you can automate any other form of music.
Listen to 1950s rock'n'roll. Much of it is skill-less, soulless mass-produced pap. Listen to a lot of the shite that came out in the 1960s - most of that was just crap. The 1970s didn't fare any better. Things started to improve in the 1980s, when recording equipment and instruments - particularly synthesizers and drum machines - became cheap enough for ordinary people to afford to buy, and set up home studios.
It wasn't until the late 1980s to early 1990s when it became possible for just about anybody with 50 quid in their pocket and some ideas to get the equipment together to produce a storming floor-filling acid house track, that we start to see real skill and passion in music.
Anything done by professionals in a recording studio is just music-by-numbers, filtered and sweetened for maximum mass appeal.
Re:Please Define by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 10:03 · Score: 0

You're missing the important element for selling hip hop - the arrogant thug-life frontman. Without that attitude...
or vagina

...you aint gonna sell shit.
FTFY
Re:Please Define by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 10:32 · Score: 0

You (or whoever was making the beats) didn't know how to use Hydrogen properly. When used by a professional, it creates very professional drum tracks. I have a friend that mixes and records several music groups at his church, and he uses Ubuntu Studio (with some modification for Ardour from a buddy), along with Hydrogen, and in any standard time signature it is impossible to tell the difference between a human and Hydrogen (even if you open up and compare the waveforms, the difference is so minor it's well beyond the human range of hearing). Nothing will beat having a human drummer though.
Re:Please Define by Pf0tzenpfritz · 2012-06-26 12:47 · Score: 1

Two weeks ago I enjoyed a little demonstration of the latest, most professional and rotten expensive piece of "music prototyping software" at my co-producers projct studio. Don't get me wrong: it's a fine app for certain tasks in -commercial, primarily movie sound track- composition that will make a real composer's life a lot easier. But if you let it just compose by algo, no matter how well elaborated your parameters are, the output is just utter crap.
In this special field -autonomous composition- there has been exactly zero progress within the last twenty years. Machine compositions may be perfectly correct by basic musical rules and they might -like Microsofts latest toy- even produce dramaturgy or "mood" but anybody with two ears and a brain between them will instantly recognize algo-generated tracks, because they completely "empty". They contain nothing of any artistic value, because there is no artist will involved. Music is the language of emotions - if any machine wants to master it, it has to know what emotions are and feel the desire to express them. That's the only point what music and arts are there for.
No feelings -> no artistic intention -> no music.

--
Oh, the beautiful gloss of greality!
Re:Please Define by Alimony+Pakhdan · 2012-06-26 13:02 · Score: 1

Been making music using electronics & computers for a long time. Had not heard of this software. Clicked the link, took a look at the screenshots. First thing I said to myself was "this is so obviously a Linux thing" meaning I figure I'd spend more time fighting/futzing with the software than making music.
Re:Please Define by Alimony+Pakhdan · 2012-06-26 13:05 · Score: 1

Besides the non politically correct bit at the end, this is basically right. FL Studio is easy to learn and easy to pirate which has quite a bit to do with why its popular in hip hop.
Re:Please Define by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 14:34 · Score: 0

I was going to say that too. Or even LMMS + samples from Hydrogen. LMMS's biggest strengths seem to be using stuff that's already out there in the way of plugins. So VSTs, VSTis, soundfonts, PAT files, LADSPA FX, etc. are all pretty much available. LMMS provides a nice tidy package with MIDI support to make them work together. It really can give a nice semi-pro sound with very little time spent trying to learn the software.
It's not all perfect though. Even though it's half-decent in the usable sense (doesn't crash too often and is very easy to use), it still needs a lot of cleanup work and finishing. Automation still leaves a lot to be desired (not to mention global automations on imported files can be a real PITA), occasionally it leaves behind spawned processes relating to plugins floating around eating up CPU time, and many features still aren't finished being implemented (undo/redo doesn't do anything at the moment), and it needs some kind of improved UI management or handling for some plugins (100 teeny tiny knobs for an EQ isn't exactly straight forward, if a scrollable window with an organized arrangement of sliders would be much better.)
More feedback from the developers to the users would be nice too. A list of current goals and targets for the next release would be what I'd like to see. (Notice I'm not saying deadlines - which may be difficult given how the process goes for some projects, but just give an idea of what to expect when the next version comes out.)
Despite those rough edges, you're likely not going to get much better without pirating or purchasing FL Studio.
If I somehow had money to put behind a music related open source project, LMMS is one I'd consider giving a boost and perhaps getting some hired-gun developers on it. From the progress rate, it feels like it has a very small team behind it with limited free time. I think the goal would be to clean up what's already there and make the things that don't work yet actually work. (Get the undo/redo with a history working, fix the damn windows so they're properly scalable on different monitor types and setups and let title bar icons and dropdowns float/reflow or become hidden so the window can be narrower if needed, add the ability to escape a process - so you can actually cancel if you change your mind on something taking too damn long, do something with constraints and scaling ranges to make automations and various dials much easier to use.)
It's not that I don't like the software, I do. Those things just bug and annoy me to no end. Yet I still manage to get some decent tracks out. Then again some of these problems may be specific to the Win32 build, but that's what I use more often than not.
Re:Please Define by boblaroc · 2012-06-26 15:51 · Score: 2

At least you only need to punch the beat into the machine once...
Re:Please Define by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 16:12 · Score: 0

Correct link for Reason: http://www.propellerheads.se/products/reason/
Re:Please Define by mjwx · 2012-06-27 00:21 · Score: 1

We already have them. Every single aspect of Justin Bieber / Britney Spears / Beyonce's projection in public life has been fabricated, test marketed, and refined down to the microscopic level.

Whilst I don't disagree with this at all, a complete fabrication they still need a human being at the centre of it, a human being that will still have issues, problems and more importantly a personality that will need to be worked around.

Whilst that real person is necessary for the fabrication they are just fake, not virtual.

Why develop a computer program to be a virtual pop star when you have living breathing human beings that are more than willing to sell every aspect of themselves already to be one?
Because computer programs don't get addicted to drugs, say things of their own accord (often racist or just incredibly stupid) or make sex tapes.

People can be adjusted to be as popular to the widest range of people possible, but this is very limited. A program will be designed from the ground up for the same goal, essentially 1 virtual pop star will fill the same roles as all the Beibers, Beyonces and Britneys.

--
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Re:Please Define by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-27 03:16 · Score: 0

No, just being a drummer is dangerous. Just don't rely on the drummer for anything more important that drumming and it wont matter if they spontaneously combust.

HIP-HOP ?? SUX !! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 03:22 · Score: 1, Insightful

It's like disco all over again !! Only by people who can't play, can't keep a tune, and make farm -animal noises !! It truly SUX !!

Re:HIP-HOP ?? SUX !! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 03:30 · Score: 0

Those three impediments alone do not preclude enjoyable music (which is not meant to imply hip hop is actual music).
Re:HIP-HOP ?? SUX !! by seven+of+five · 2012-06-26 03:44 · Score: 1

Oh, come on, dude! What the world needs now is MORE BEATS! MORE!!!
Re:HIP-HOP ?? SUX !! by AngryDeuce · 2012-06-26 03:49 · Score: 2

Every genre has it's good and bad. Listen to modern country music and tell me you don't find it just as shit-tier as hip-hop and I'm calling you a liar. She think's my tractor's sexy! Yee-fucking-HAW!!!!
Then of course there's The Bieb and Lady Gaga's garbage. And Guns 'n' Roses' and Van Halen's new garbage. And Metallica's garbage. And Skrillex's garbage...
It goes on and on. Hip-hop doesn't have a monopoly on shitty music at all...
Re:HIP-HOP ?? SUX !! by ackthpt · 2012-06-26 03:54 · Score: 2

It's like disco all over again !! Only by people who can't play, can't keep a tune, and make farm -animal noises !! It truly SUX !!
It's also for people who are extremely bad at poetry, but want to express themselves and get $$$ anyway.

--

A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Re:HIP-HOP ?? SUX !! by The+Grim+Reefer · 2012-06-26 03:58 · Score: 1

Oh, come on, dude! What the world needs now is MORE BEATS! MORE!!!
Actually it needs more cowbell.
Re:HIP-HOP ?? SUX !! by uncanny · 2012-06-26 04:14 · Score: 1

OH, or a program that simulates a cowbell sound!!!

un-tsss-un-tsss-CLANG-un-tsss-un-tsss-CLANG
Re:HIP-HOP ?? SUX !! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 04:18 · Score: 0

I used to laugh at a guy who listened to Conway Twitty (yeah Scott Neilson, you). Older Family Guy cut-aways have brought my laughter to a halt. Good stuff.
Re:HIP-HOP ?? SUX !! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 04:34 · Score: 0

That would be a really odd meter.
I think you meant something along the lines:
un-tsss-CLANG-tsss-un-tsss-CLANG-tsss
Full disclosure: i'm an amateur producer.
Re:HIP-HOP ?? SUX !! by chispito · 2012-06-26 05:18 · Score: 1

>It's also for people who are extremely bad at poetry, but want to express themselves and get $$$ anyway.
There are people who are well paid for good poetry?

--
The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
Re:HIP-HOP ?? SUX !! by ulski · 2012-06-26 05:55 · Score: 1

this is what he meant - except there was no CLANG to it http://techcrunch.com/2010/11/29/google-beatbox/
Re:HIP-HOP ?? SUX !! by AngryDeuce · 2012-06-26 06:10 · Score: 1

Yeah, as opposed to masterpieces such as 'Purple Haze':
Purple haze all in my brain
Lately things just don't seem the same
Actin' funny, but I don't know why
'Scuse me while I kiss the sky

Purple haze all around
Don't know if I'm comin' up or down
Am I happy or in misery?
Whatever it is, that girl put a spell on me

Help me help me
Oh no no... no
Yeah
Purple haze all in my eyes
Don't know if it's day or night
You've got me blowin, blowin my mind
Is it tomorrow or just the end of time?

No, help me aw yeah! oh no no oh help me...
Poetry is subjective, obviously. And for the record, I like Jimi Hendrix, but let's not pretend there is any great poetic meaning there.
Re:HIP-HOP ?? SUX !! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 06:10 · Score: 0

More juvenile posturings over lame ass beats? I think I'll pass.
Re:HIP-HOP ?? SUX !! by VortexCortex · 2012-06-26 07:34 · Score: 1

She Think's My Tractor's sexy? Really? At least that's about country-ish stuff. You pick that as an example of shite country music over: Online?
Matrix-y background graphics... Lyrics about being a slashdotter, I think. Is a steel guitar and fake draws all that's needed to classify as country music?
Re:HIP-HOP ?? SUX !! by VortexCortex · 2012-06-26 07:35 · Score: 1

crap, WTF happened to the html link? Screw it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqNmYwxK2Z4
Re:HIP-HOP ?? SUX !! by mcgrew · 2012-06-26 08:14 · Score: 1

I agree, I've always said that hip-hop is 21st century disco (even if hip hop did start in the 1970s but was underground for two decades).

--
Free Martian Whores!
Re:HIP-HOP ?? SUX !! by acid_andy · 2012-06-26 10:05 · Score: 1

Oh, come on, dude! What the world needs now is MORE BEATS! MORE!!!
Actually it needs more cowbell.
Or vagina.

--
Your ad here.
Re:HIP-HOP ?? SUX !! by Pf0tzenpfritz · 2012-06-26 12:50 · Score: 1

5/4 is not that uncommon. In pop music, however...

--
Oh, the beautiful gloss of greality!

LMMS by MrSome · 2012-06-26 03:27 · Score: 4, Interesting

Is LMMS not good enough?

IMO, that type of music is so generic anymore, I'm surprised some mathematician hasn't created an algorithm to generate hit songs on command.

You know, something like (BPM / Key + Attractiveness of Prospective Performer) = $$$

Re:LMMS by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 03:36 · Score: 1

They did.
Re:LMMS by geekmux · 2012-06-26 04:30 · Score: 1

...IMO, that type of music is so generic anymore, I'm surprised some mathematician hasn't created an algorithm to generate hit songs on command...
I don't need an algorithm to tell me Autotune is the one who should be taking credit for the singing today, not the prepubescent pretty face on stage taking dancing lessons who can't sing for shit.
Re:LMMS by cellocgw · 2012-06-26 04:55 · Score: 1

I don't need an algorithm to tell me Autotune is the one who should be taking credit for the singing today, not the prepubescent pretty face on stage taking dancing lessons who can't sing for shit.
I always thought it would be fun to run Autotune in reverse: take a completely synthesized voice (Siri singing Led Zep's greatest hits), let De-Autotune (TM) screw it up, and run the audio equivalent of the Turing Test on the output.

--
https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
Re:LMMS by Wandering+Voice · 2012-06-26 05:00 · Score: 1
Ive explored LMMS a little and its a great tool, but it is not very stable on my system. Though, I am happy to see that there are regular updates to the software and it is always improving.
While it unfortunate that like many popular genres of music a lot of crap floats to the surface, but there are always a few gems to be found.
- Younger Brother - All I Want
- Shpongle - Around the World in a Tea Daze
Re:LMMS by wukka · 2012-06-26 05:10 · Score: 1

LMMS is cool but will blow minds. Maybe a "Music for Dummies" type iPad app, with big fluffy teletubby buttons. Mother Goose can help, when they get stuck with their silly rhymes.
Re:LMMS by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 05:52 · Score: 2, Insightful

IMO, that type of music is so generic anymore, I'm surprised some mathematician hasn't created an algorithm to generate hit songs on command.
You know, something like (BPM / Key + Attractiveness of Prospective Performer) = $$$
Yeah really, that Michaelangelo guy, all he did was move a brush over a surface. ANYONE CAN DO THAT!
If it's that easy, why aren't you out there doing it? The answer is that, in all reality, it isn't easy. It's actually really fucking hard. If it's that easy, you should go ahead and try to make a career out of it with your spare time on the weekends. And please, keep a blog up to date with your efforts, so I can come back and mock you for failing at something that's so easy a computer should be able to do it.
Re:LMMS by MrSome · 2012-06-26 08:20 · Score: 1

Don't get all butt hurt Lil AC. Please tell me all about your favorite hip hop artist and how they compare to Michaelangelo.
I'm probably not doing it because I feel like all that music is generic and it could be computer generated. So why would I waste time on it? Didn't you read my post? The part where I said "IMO"? Oh wait, you thought your opinion would change mine? Sorry. I enjoy rap and hip/hop as much as the next guy, but I take it for what it's worth.
Re:LMMS by TehNoobTrumpet · 2012-06-26 08:49 · Score: 1

Good music production is an art in itself, just because there's an overwhelming amount of shitty and popular hip hop doesn't mean that the whole genre sucks.
Even producing a 'shitty' hip hop beat takes more effort than you're giving it credit for; unless you're already a producer/engineer in another genre there's a lot of material to learn before it even sounds presentable by generic hip hop standards.
Re:LMMS by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-01 07:53 · Score: 0

Everyone gets autotuned, including your favorite hipster band. There are just ways to hide it, if you can hear tell that one artist is autotuned then either 1. It's on purpose or 2. Their audio engineer sucks. A lot.

SoundTracker/NoiseTracker by CanEHdian · 2012-06-26 03:35 · Score: 2

Didn't we make beats in NoiseTracker (remember Mahoney & Kaktus) on the Amiga back in the late 80s? So the sound sucks by today's standards, but the software was simple to use and free. Why would today's "beat making software" be so expensive?

--
When the copyright term is "forever minus a day", live every day like it's the last.

Re:SoundTracker/NoiseTracker by six025 · 2012-06-26 05:04 · Score: 1

Didn't we make beats in NoiseTracker
The source code for NoiseTracker was used as the basis for Renoise, which is cross-platform including Linux, but not free. It's a reasonably popular host for composing songs / beats that obviously appeals to a fairly specific group of users due to it's tracker heritage. Most musicians prefer the piano roll for editing MIDI, which is used in most other hosts including Cubase, Ableton Live and Logic (none of which are available for Linux, and Logic is only available on Mac).
As for the cost: Renoise is around EUR 60.00. Reaper is a similar price for a non-commercial license, but only runs on Linux using Wine. The "high-end" or industry standard hosts cost considerably more. Although the price of Logic was recently reduced to $199 - which is a bargain - Cubase is more expensive, as is Ableton Live which can cost up to $800 depending on how much content is included.
Why aren't there more hosts available for Linux? It's about the plugins - similar to video editing suites, there is an ecosystem of audio plugin instrument and effects developers, and the users who have invested heavily in these plugins. The plugins adhere to specific standards (VST, AU and RTAS mainly) so developing for Linux is just not very cost effective for most of these developers, and users are generally unwilling to change to Linux because the plugins they own are not supported.
Also, the VST SDK (supported by most audio hosts on Mac and Win with a few notable exceptions) needs to be licensed from Steinberg (they also develop the main VST host Cubase). It is possible to use VST plugins on Linux, but it requires a reasonable amount of technical skill to do - and one must download and build the SDK, which is not strictly legal.
Peace,
Andy.
Re:SoundTracker/NoiseTracker by wukka · 2012-06-26 05:20 · Score: 1

Open ModPlug Tracker is opensource: http://openmpt.org/
Re:SoundTracker/NoiseTracker by VortexCortex · 2012-06-26 07:41 · Score: 1

Didn't we make beats in NoiseTracker (remember Mahoney & Kaktus) on the Amiga back in the late 80s? So the sound sucks by today's standards,
Chiptuners would disagree. I guess, like all standards, it's more like a guideline?
Re:SoundTracker/NoiseTracker by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-27 03:56 · Score: 0

For something more modern and tracker like, it wouldn't hurt to try SunVox. It's free (as in beer) on major OSs and cheap on iOS devices.

Bullshit. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 03:37 · Score: 0

Beat making software is incredibly expensive? There are plenty of low-cost recording and beat making tools available. Even the pricier ones often have an entry-level version with features pruned.

riaa will try to shut them down better have a big by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 03:37 · Score: 0

riaa will try to shut them down better have a big legal fund

Why? by zmooc · 2012-06-26 03:40 · Score: 3, Interesting

Why the hell does this make slashdot?! So we have people with a dream and they are calling for others to help them... Why would anybody do that if they could just as easily help the guys behind great stuff like Ardour, LMMS, Rosegarden, Miep, Hydrogen and the many other applications that aim to do somewhat exactly what these people dream of?!

Why don't these dreamy people join any of the existing projects?

--
0x or or snor perron?!

Re:Why? by X0563511 · 2012-06-26 04:38 · Score: 3, Interesting

Because those programs you mention are tuned towards actual composition, not hip-hop "beats" creation.
(translation: too complicated)

--
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 06:18 · Score: 1

LMMS is turned toward hip-hop "beats" creation, idiot.
Re:Why? by X0563511 · 2012-06-26 06:44 · Score: 1

No, it's not. I've used it, several other open solutions, and several commercial offerings.

--
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
Re:Why? by logicassasin · 2012-06-26 06:45 · Score: 1

Because they might not like any of these programs. Isn't that the reason why many pieces of software were started in the first place?

--
Fifty watts per channel, baby cakes.
Re:Why? by antdude · 2012-06-26 07:05 · Score: 1

Two words: Open source.

--
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
Re:Why? by zmooc · 2012-06-26 08:20 · Score: 1

"Many pieces of software" were started because programmers just started writing them. They proved their worth and got help. I see no code here. Why would anybody capable of writing such software join a bunch of people that have basically nothing to offer but their dream? And, especially, why would these people make slashdot headlines? I'd rather see some more attention to projects that actually have code than projects that are nothing more but an idea.

--
0x or or snor perron?!
Re:Why? by Disfnord · 2012-06-27 02:06 · Score: 1

Those are all open source.
Re:Why? by antdude · 2012-06-27 02:21 · Score: 1

Yes. /. 3s open source so it got posted. :P

--
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).

already been done! by uncanny · 2012-06-26 03:40 · Score: 1

It's called a drum. That's what keeps the beat in music. It's open source too, just have to buy a little hardware.

Re:already been done! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 03:53 · Score: 0

This is the greatest post ever. Music is about moving air, and a silicon chip just isn't the same thing.
You should feel what you're playing as a force in the room.
Re:already been done! by ackthpt · 2012-06-26 03:58 · Score: 1

It's called a drum. That's what keeps the beat in music. It's open source too, just have to buy a little hardware.
The most original and impressive drum album ever - Drums of Passion Stop playing around with Hip Hop and learn to compose and play like this and you will be legend.

--

A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Re:already been done! by lisaparratt · 2012-06-26 04:16 · Score: 1, Insightful

If you think a silicon chip can't do that, you've clearly never been to a techno party.
Re:already been done! by fustakrakich · 2012-06-26 04:35 · Score: 1

A famous guy once said something similar about the paino: "There;s nothing remarkable about it. All one has to do is hit the right keys at the right time and the instrument plays itself."

--
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Re:already been done! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 05:23 · Score: 0

I found a link for those interested: http://www.mediafire.com/?fd9zx2ckd1xfals
Re:already been done! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 05:27 · Score: 0

I think you're confusing 'the music' doing that with 'the extacsy'.
Re:already been done! by mcgrew · 2012-06-26 07:28 · Score: 0

Yes, but that requires something no hip-hop band has ever had -- musical talent.

--
Free Martian Whores!

Who cares? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 03:42 · Score: 0

You can't make decent hip hop without an SP-1200 anyway.

No, this can't be emulated because it has analog SSM filters that have been out of production since the mid 90's.

Not even close to true by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 03:48 · Score: 0

"Beat making software is incredibly expensive, and the high price limits usage to those who can afford it and have no creativity, musical ability, talent or way to research making beats."

OK, so I added the last few words to the quote, but they needed to be said. Anyone who wants to make beats can make them. You don't need Reason 6 to do so. You only need Reason 6 if you want to make a beat of a certain type/quality a certain way entirely on a computer and expend nearly no effort whatsoever on making a (usually trite, overdone and horrible) beat.

"Two professors at UNC have a dream of allowing all artists access to beat making software, regardless of income level"

Everyone has always been able to make beats, regardless of income level. There exists a lot of cheap/free beat making software. Tons of beat making hardware is available cheaply on the used market, too. Artists have recorded beats using all sorts of equipment, devices, software and sometimes using objects that aren't even instruments. It's not difficult. The only thing they want to do is make software with the Reason 6 style interface to create beats. This is not ground breaking or world changing, it's not really helping anyone but those who want Reason 6 but don't want to pay for or pirate it.

Look, I'm all for an open source beat making project. But the way they paint this is just plain insulting and ignorant.

Re:Open Source == FAIL by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 03:52 · Score: 0

You've gone so far beyond full-retarded that it would take the light from full-retarded a thousand years to reach you.

Think different.
Think STUPID.
Think A/C!

Its a little too broad to say "beat making" soft.. by Romxero · 2012-06-26 03:54 · Score: 1

These days when people want beat making software, they usually want something that will sequence drums, come with sampled instruments, record tracks and have effects all in one package. Of course regular DAW software like Cubase will do this, but from my observation- DJ's along with novices want something simplistic so they can psuedo-produce pieces in a minute amount of time. So to sum this up ~ Beat making software = easy software for dj's and non professionals. As for making beats with open source software, its awesome. I've personally made some tunes with the linuxsampler that you can check out at: http://www.youtube.com/romxero

Re:Open Source == FAIL by jones_supa · 2012-06-26 03:55 · Score: 1

It depends. How about projects like PuTTY, OpenTTD, TrueCrypt, Mozilla Firefox, etc? They are quite polished software. I agree with the quality assurance of Linux desktops being in a bit sad state, but OSS in general is not necessarily the way to doom.

Re:riaa will try to shut them down better have a b by ackthpt · 2012-06-26 03:56 · Score: 1

riaa will try to shut them down better have a big legal fund

Why would RIAA do that? They love people creating the stuff, as long as they get a cut of the action.

--

A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar

linuxsampler dropped the ball by akirapill · 2012-06-26 03:59 · Score: 4, Insightful

The centerpiece of any hip hop studio is the sampler. There exists a very high quality open source sampler called linuxsampler but they are not included in any mainstream linux repos because of their bone-headed, legally invalid licence. So you have to build it from source, a painful process that I've never been able to do in under 2 hours. There is a lot of high quality foss studio software out there, but as long as developers keep dropping the ball like this we're going to see more reinventing of the wheel like this and not a lot of progress. An excellent foss program for beat-making I would recommend is qtractor, but it does not come with a sampler.

Re:linuxsampler dropped the ball by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 09:42 · Score: 0

The centerpiece of any hip hop studio is the sampler.
or vagina.
http://idle.slashdot.org/story/12/06/11/1141253/raunchy-dance-routine-a-pr-nightmare-for-microsoft

Stolen code? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 04:00 · Score: 0

I'm sure that they stole--oh, excuse me, "sampled"--the code from somewhere else.

Holy crap, you are stupid by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 04:04 · Score: 1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_(operating_system)

"It is composed of code developed by Apple, as well as code derived from NeXTSTEP, BSD, and other free software projects."

https://developer.apple.com/opensource/index.html

"Apple, the first major computer company to make Open Source development
a key part of its software strategy, continues to use and release significant
quantities of open source software."

Their 'first' statement is questionable, but does nothing for your argument either way pilgrim.

Re:Holy crap, you are stupid by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 04:43 · Score: 0

As a Mac user, I'm happy that you put that moron in its place. I don't want to be associated with idiots who think OS X is immune to trojans, that closed source is the way to go for everything and that Mac users buy a Mac for some kind of social status symbol.
Re:Holy crap, you are stupid by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 05:46 · Score: 0

And how many people use Darwin compared to OS X or even iOS? You idiots keep circling the drain with your arguments, each one actually WORSE than the last. You must all be Lin-sux distribution makers.
Think different.
Think better.
Think APPLE!

Re:Open Source == FAIL by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 04:07 · Score: 0

What about those projects? They all basically all irrelevant, as they have tiny user bases and almost no one has even heard of them or bother to use them. In the case of Firefox it has millions of users, but the software development is PAID for by Google with advertising. Plus it sucks compared to Safari, Chrome and even IE 10. If you are trying to argue that open source doesn't suck, you have sadly failed, just like open source.

BULLSHIT by jsepeta · 2012-06-26 04:11 · Score: 0

Beat making software is FREE or near-free. Audacity doesn't cost a dime. Paying to clear samples, well that's a topic for another article. As far as making your own sounds, there are tons of free and inexpensive software synths, and free or inexpensive WAV collections (samples or loops). I own a bunch of $2-$5 beat making apps for my iPhone. Native Instruments iMaschine costs $5 and allows you to sample and compose songs using your own recordings/samples. I'm not sure that 'beat making' needs to be much cheaper, although I applaud the effort to design open source solutions.
http://www.native-instruments.com/#/products/producer/imaschine/

As far as recording songs and producing high-quality finished product, there are of course expensive DAW options (ProTools, Cubase, Logic, Sonar, Digital Performer) and less expensive options (Reaper, Ardour -- hey, time to figure out how it works _is_ money). Free options include Garageband, which is pretty damned good, and the new Presonus Studio One Free, which I have yet to try. Why something special has to be created specifically for hiphop? That doesn't make sense.

--
Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.

Re:BULLSHIT by djlemma · 2012-06-26 04:48 · Score: 1

As mentioned in TFA, they already use Audacity. I don't know if you've ever tried to make music with just Audacity, but if not let me save you the trouble. It's not the right tool.. it's a waveform editor. Funny enough, of all the studio software you listed, the one they're actually trying to replicate wasn't mentioned- Reason. These people aren't needing strong multitrack recording and mixing ability, they need good software synths tied together into a nice interface.

Of course, they could suck it up and deal with the somewhat less expensive FruityLoops, but still we're talking about hundreds of dollars. Or I guess they could try to mishmash together a bunch of iPhone apps and random software synths, but that's not very cohesive, and would still add up quickly if you were trying to get as much functionality as Reason.

As mentioned by one of the first posters- I think a lot of the actual indy hip-hop artists just pirate the software they want to use, maybe purchase it later if they come onto some cash.. but the people in TFA are academics wanting to use the software in an academic environment, and 20 seats of Reason is like $9000.
Re:BULLSHIT by sixsixtysix · 2012-06-26 08:26 · Score: 1

awesome. just bought that app. thx for posting!

--
...

Hydrogen Drum Machine by skywatcher2501 · 2012-06-26 04:12 · Score: 1

And what about the Hydrogen drum machine software, isn't that what they would aim for? So, why reinventing the wheel?

But admittedly I'm not an audio professional so maybe all this free/opensource software is missing key features I don't know about, which only commercial tools are providing so far...

What??? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 04:12 · Score: 0

"incredibly expensive"

WTF??? I mean seriously, what is this shit?

Renoise is 58 euro, Reaper is $60, FL Studio Express is $39 for fuck's sake! All of those are full-featured digital audio workstations.

Its not the beats, Dre... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 04:14 · Score: 1

Eminem: Cmon dawg im not feelin this
Dr Dre: Im trying em give me a second,
Legendary Bruce Dickenson: You need more cowbell, dammit!!
Eminem: Yeah thats what im talking about Bruce. Give me more of that motha fuckin' cowbell!!

YOU ONLY GET ONE SHOT *ding* DO NOT MISS YOUR CHANCE TO BLOW *ding* THIS OPPORTUNITY COMES ONCE IN A LIFETIME *ding ding ding*

Already exists by PenquinCoder · 2012-06-26 04:15 · Score: 1

http://lmms.sourceforge.net/ and http://ardour.org/

Really? by Lumpy · 2012-06-26 04:17 · Score: 1

Did they even look? Rosegarden does exactly what they are after... There is even a OSS version of Fruity Loops.

--
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.

Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 10:55 · Score: 0

I was wondering why fruity loops wasn't mentioned...

Ridiculously expensive? I think not. by Yoozer · 2012-06-26 04:26 · Score: 2

Good luck with yet another DAW. Thing is, this is nonsense - making music never has been cheaper, and the price is still dropping.

$60 for Reaper and a slew of free as in beer plugins is not ridiculously expensive, and Reaper's anything but crippled.

Re:Ridiculously expensive? I think not. by wonkey_monkey · 2012-06-26 05:17 · Score: 2

Good luck with yet another DAW
Digital Audio Workstation. Solving the world energy crisis one unnecessary Google search at a time!

--
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.

You lost me at "Hip Hop Artist" by JudgeFurious · 2012-06-26 04:26 · Score: 3, Funny

Isn't that like saying "Cheeseburger Physicist".

--
Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.

Re:You lost me at "Hip Hop Artist" by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 06:49 · Score: 0

Yes, it's exactly like it. If you're an idiot or racist.
- Someone who rarely listens to hip hop, but knows it's an art form.
Re:You lost me at "Hip Hop Artist" by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 07:47 · Score: 0

By referring to that comment as racist, you are yourself making racist assumptions.
The worst racists are the ones who don't know they're racist.
Re:You lost me at "Hip Hop Artist" by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 10:40 · Score: 0

Yes, like the OP. Having an unreasonable hostility to hip-hop is fine, but when your first reaction to hip-hop artists making an open source tool is to question the art-form's validity and draw analogies based on how dumb you think the artists are, c'mon. That's a dog whistle and all the racist dogs can hear it. I don't doubt that such posts will be modded into the sky, because everyone knows some of slashdot's biggest faults are the widespread racism and sexism.
Re:You lost me at "Hip Hop Artist" by JudgeFurious · 2012-06-26 15:09 · Score: 1

Cry racism all you want. It doesn't make my words racist anymore than calling these people "artists" makes them in fact artists. I'd have posted a similar comment if the story had been about pop artists but you wouldn't know that because you don't know anything about me.

--
Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
Re:You lost me at "Hip Hop Artist" by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 16:04 · Score: 0

These people are artists in the same way that people posting articles on Slashdot are artists.
You can take that however you want.
Re:You lost me at "Hip Hop Artist" by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 16:13 · Score: 0

I don't NEED to know anything about you. What makes you so special that you need intensive study before an opinion can be made about you? And what makes hip-hop artists so different that their artistic merits can be swept away with a dismissive wave of your "not-racist" hand?

Old school by raketman11 · 2012-06-26 04:28 · Score: 1

What happened to two turntables and a microphone? Lots of pioneers seemed to create beats that way...

--
trans corpus mortuum

Re:Old school by tepples · 2012-06-26 05:49 · Score: 1

Sony, Warner, and Vivendi claimed exclusive rights to the output of the turntables, that's what.
Re:Old school by djlemma · 2012-06-26 08:11 · Score: 1

Technics 1200's are discontinued, dubplates are no longer something you can easily get made, physical record stores are extremely rare, the selection is lacking at the record stores that have held on...

Then again, if you were willing to spend the money on turntables and records, getting a vinyl controlled mp3 solution wouldn't be a huge jump. And I think a lot of artists do just that....

meh by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 04:28 · Score: 0

as some others have pointed out, "Beat making software" is not incredibly expensive.

there is a ton of other free and/or cheap music software out there. even entire linux distros like pure:dyne...i'd go so far as to say that, especially considering how much music software is pirated (which i believe the music software industry tolerates to a greater extent than most, altho no proper evidence for this), making beats is one of the cheapest computer-based creative activities around. you don't need lots of ram or gpu action either.

at least in the uk, loads of classic urban/beat-driven music over the last ten years was made with fruityloops (now fl studio) or even those music games on a playstation. not to mention that pretty much all tracker software is free, or all the "chiptune" software which all runs on old and usually very cheap gear. heck, ppl who were making music in the late 90s might even remember that the early versions of Pro Tools (w/out the hardware) were free!!?!

reading the article, the professors specifically chose to use software that retails for over 400EUR for their "beat making lab" class and this project was born out of frustration with the pricetag. perhaps a reason for the price is that this particular software's interface emulates a rack of 'real' outboard gear, complete with fake patch cords that you drag around the screen? i suppose 400EUR must seem like a good deal compared to buying all those analog synths and compressors...

anyway they are correct that there is no open source software which is an exact 1-to-1 replacement for the software they use for their class, and i say good on them for wanting to code something. but what they're doing seems redundant - they could have used less expensive (and probably more interesting) software to start with. then again i guess they wouldn't have been invited to rio to give their pitch!

As expected... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 04:35 · Score: 0

TFA mentions they use open-source Audacity along with closed-source/for-profit Reason. Predictably enough they want an open-source alternative to Reason - I figured it would be that, or Pro Tools, or Live, or one of the other standard closed-source music platforms.

That's because a lot of money has gone into making those tools stable, capable, and good-sounding. You can argue any one of those points, and there are lots of legitimate gripes with DRM schemes, but generally the music software that costs something outperforms the stuff that's free.

I've used all three of the apps mentioned but neither purchased nor pirated them, and I haven't spent money on *any* music software in over 5 years. I'm fine with the free stuff personally.

I can understand why you'd want a free alternative especially in a teaching setting, if only to avoid the registration hassles, but I don't think they realize you can't just shout "open source it!" and magically have a free version that's actually comparable.

In Soviet Russia... by coldsalmon · 2012-06-26 04:43 · Score: 1

University professors teach Congolese youths how to make beats.

Re:In Soviet Russia... by wukka · 2012-06-26 05:14 · Score: 1

In Soviet Russia, drums beat you.

Professors? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 04:44 · Score: 0

Both these guys have their PhD? What is their area of study?

Re:Professors? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 06:00 · Score: 0

Niggology.

Two professors at UNC? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 04:45 · Score: 0

Figures...

UNCe UNCe UNCe UNCe UNCe UNCe UNCe UNCe UNCe UNCe UNCe

They've got a nice beat going already.

Re:Open Source == FAIL by brainzach · 2012-06-26 04:57 · Score: 1

Open Source works better for some types of software more than others.

Audio software requires using audio engineers and guys who know a lot if math if you want to produce something that can be used professionally. This isn't the type of tasks that the average programmer can tackle.

Re:Open Source == FAIL by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 04:58 · Score: 0

http://youtu.be/FvcJqcUlYTo

Grumpy old troll, go back under your bridge.

No, it is not. by logicassasin · 2012-06-26 05:08 · Score: 3, Interesting

I've struggled with LMMS for years. I give a try quite often and the end result is torturous. It tries hard to be FL Studio, but "different" but lacks so much that making anything is just entirely too awkward. I've considered contributing to the project but simply don't have the time to invest in it.

I stick with FL Studio and Cubase for my hip hop work (with ProTools M-Powered strictly to send out sessions to studios).

--
Fifty watts per channel, baby cakes.

Re:No, it is not. by MrSome · 2012-06-26 05:46 · Score: 1

It's free... if you can afford Cubase/Pro Tools. Then yes... use those. But this guy doesn't want to pay... so why would something like LMMS not be good enough to teach someone to make a beat? We're not talking about producing a track for Dr. Diddy, or Jay Snoop.
Why does it seem like, when it comes to software, people don't apply the "beggars can't be choosers" mentality?
"I don't want to pay for it."
"Ok, here you go. I did this in my spare time!"
"That's not what I wanted... this sucks. Spend more of your free time and make it better."
" ... ?"
Re:No, it is not. by logicassasin · 2012-06-26 06:43 · Score: 3, Interesting

It's free... if you can afford Cubase/Pro Tools. Then yes... use those. But this guy doesn't want to pay... so why would something like LMMS not be good enough to teach someone to make a beat? We're not talking about producing a track for Dr. Diddy, or Jay Snoop.
Why does it seem like, when it comes to software, people don't apply the "beggars can't be choosers" mentality?
"I don't want to pay for it."
"Ok, here you go. I did this in my spare time!"
"That's not what I wanted... this sucks. Spend more of your free time and make it better."
" ... ?"
If's not about whether or not it's "free", it's about whether it's functional or not. Your argument is a typical cop-out whenever the functionality of a FOSS app is called into question. If you've made the decision to write something like this and release it for the world to see, then you need to be prepared to address issues people have with the software. Yes, we could always go out and buy another piece of software instead of using that which you wrote for free, but we're giving your stuff a shot to look for that alternative so being receptive to criticism is part of the process. If the authors didn't want anyone to speak ill of their software, they should have kept it to themselves. Part of the open source process is people contributing to it's usability by giving input like "Hey, maybe you could make plugin selection a bit more obvious to the end user, it's a pain to deal with right now". We all may not have coding skills, but our input on workflow is just as valid.
I've tried Rosegarden under Linux and it works pretty well but several key VST plugins I use simply don't work. Were it not for that, I'd recommend it all day long.
FWIW, FL Studio's basic package costs only $49, with a more functional version at $99. While I understand that some people believe that they can't afford $99, if you're really serious about music you will save for it. Same for Cubase: Steinberg offers an entry level version of Cubase for $99 that's rather well featured for the price (serious music can be made with the "Elements" package). EnergyXT is not only cheap (€59), but also cross platform, working on Windows, MacOS, AND Linux!
For the musician on a budget, there are options. FOSS is one of them if you can find an application you like. LMMS is just not that package for me.

--
Fifty watts per channel, baby cakes.
Re:No, it is not. by rk · 2012-06-26 07:08 · Score: 1

Energy/XT is pretty darned nice for the cheap price tag! I use it quite a bit for music projects. I like the ability to wire up synths and effects in a visual way that hearkens back to my patch panel days.
Re:No, it is not. by MrSome · 2012-06-26 07:49 · Score: 1

If's not about whether or not it's "free"
Sure it is... the article was from a guy who wants Reason, but the open source (free) version of it. If he wanted to pay, he already would have.
Remember, this guy wants this so he can teach his beginner class on how to make practical beats. He's not talking about some serious producer affording $99 and up software. So, in your experience, do you really think in 14 weeks, maybe 6 hours a week, a newbie will master all of the basics of making a beat, and using all of the functionality in something like LMMS, or any of the other options people listed here? I doubt it.
Let's call this what it is... he found OpenOffice and GIMP, and doesn't want to pay for commercial quality software anymore. So he's trying to get other people to make Reason for him... rather than picking up a book and learning how to develop himself. Agreed? Agreed.

Wow. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 05:23 · Score: 0

Want to see slashdot at it's most closed minded with one hell of a holier than thou attitude, post about music.

Music software is NOT expensive. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 05:26 · Score: 0

Fruity Loops and Renoise are incredibly cheap and are also extremely powerful. Look to older tracker software for simple and effective beat loops as well. It's well-covered ground. What the hip-hop industry needs is TALENT and to PUT THE GODDAMN AUTO TUNE AWAY ALREADY. I remember a few years ago everyone was using or biting off of the Neptunes. Seriously, the problem is that the industry is full of people grabbing at cash and very few of them are actually artistically inspired in some unique and original way. And it's not really just the hip-hop industry, it's pretty much across the board.

garageband?? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 05:41 · Score: 0

LOL what???
GarageBand costs like $40 and comes pre-installed *free* on every single Macintosh.

and yeah you can make hella sick beats using just garageband and some imagination.
damn.

Re:garageband?? by CanHasDIY · 2012-06-26 06:42 · Score: 1

LOL what??? GarageBand costs like $40 and comes pre-installed *free* on every single Macintosh.
and yeah you can make hella sick beats using just garageband and some imagination. damn.
I wouldn't really consider that free, considering you have to buy an obscenely overpriced computer before you can so much as install it...

--
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese

It ain't all bad by Trentus · 2012-06-26 05:42 · Score: 2

A lot of the comments have been hating on hip-hop, and well, I can't say I blame them. Most of the stuff you hear is just the same old shit. Some boring harmony over a lifeless beat and some lyrics that are so dishonest that it's almost offensive. But then you get some people who take hip-hop and turn it into something wonderful.

There are/were quite a few jazz guys who are taking the chill groove of hip-hop and fusing it with jazz, adding beautiful harmonies and some honest expression. In the 90's there was Branford Marsalis and his group Buckshot LeFonque who mixed jazz, funk, hip-hop, rock and pop. The Dirty Dozen Brass Band fuse the New Orleans brass band sound with just about everything they encounter, including hip-hop (probably best heard on their album What's Going On?). Trumpeter Roy Hargrove has The RH Factor, who deal in a dirty club type of groove.

Then there are guys like Robert Glasper or Jason Lindner who seem to play a more modern jazz with a heavy hip-hop influence. More adventurous harmonic and rhythmic devices, more of an improvised nature, generally smaller groups, but still with that same spacious and cool feel, played in a way that someone could rap over top.

If you think you hate hip-hop but love beautiful, honest music then I implore you to check out some of these groups. They may spark an interest in the genre that will lead you to search for more... of course, when you come across some guy singing about his drugs, money and women, it's perfectly fine to politely tell him to fuck off. Just don't let those arseholes stop you from listening to good music, whatever genre they happen to be polluting.

Re:It ain't all bad by hguorbray · 2012-06-26 10:19 · Score: 1

going back to the 80s we had Digable Planets,The Fugees, A tribe called Quest and bay area greats Digital Underground (Tupac was once a member) and bassist Bill Laswell has done some work in that area -fast forward to awesome Hip Hop/Rock experiments like Damon Albarn/Danger Mouse Gorrilaz albums (especially the incomparable Demon Days) -in fact you could just buy almost anything that Danger Mouse or Damon Albarn has done and not go wrong.

Not to mention other crossovers like Beck, the Beasties, Japanese guitar/mix sensation Cornelius, will.i.am, N.E.R.D, Unkle and comedy hip-hoppers LMFAO

I come across interesting, non-mainstream rap/hip hop all the time on our 4 great college stations here in the bay area: KSJS, KSCU, KFJC and KZSU

-I'm just sayin'

Vocaloid by tepples · 2012-06-26 05:46 · Score: 1

take a completely synthesized voice (Siri singing Led Zep's greatest hits), let De-Autotune (TM) screw it up, and run the audio equivalent of the Turing Test on the output.

They did that. It was called Vocaloid, and it created a monster.

Rosegarden and Buzztard (Jeskola Buzz) by HalAtWork · 2012-06-26 05:46 · Score: 3, Informative

Rosegarden and Buzztard are great for such purposes, and are both open source.

--
Twinstiq, game news

there is nearly-free software out there by rickb928 · 2012-06-26 05:47 · Score: 2

CM Studio is inadequate? Every issue of Computer Music comes with a DVD, CMStudio being the centerpiece, with loads of samples etc.

No, not free. Usually about $15 in the US, £6+ in UK, more elsewhere I bet.

If you don't wanna pay $15, well, have at it.

--
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.

Re:there is nearly-free software out there by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 06:24 · Score: 1

No, not free. Usually about $15...
Free software is about freedom, not price.
Re:there is nearly-free software out there by rickb928 · 2012-06-26 06:55 · Score: 1

Then you are free to use the free software that doesn't exist.

--
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.

a real drummer?? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 06:42 · Score: 0

I guess if there is no one in their group talented enough to play drums, they need "beat making software"

Can anyone tell me the title of that rap "song" by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 07:05 · Score: 0

...where the yeller starts barking about how he's got a big dick, likes wearing lots of flashy jewelry, is gonna show off his expensive car, isn't gonna take shit from The Man, mentions his gang affiliation, etc? It has this drum machine beat that repeats throughout the entire song, almost no chord progression at all. Anyone know the "song" I'm talking about?

Re:Can anyone tell me the title of that rap "song" by MrSome · 2012-06-26 08:27 · Score: 1

I love that song!

Is this it?

Re:riaa will try to shut them down better have a b by mcgrew · 2012-06-26 07:41 · Score: 1

Why would RIAA do that? They love people creating the stuff, as long as they get a cut of the action.

That's the problem in a nutshell; nobody needs the RIAA to record and album any more, nor to popularize it. That's why the RIAA was always against CD burners and file sharing sites; they are used by RIAA labels' competetion, the indies.

When my daughter was a teenager (she's 25 now), she bought very little RIAA fare, instead going for indie stuff and even local bands (she was into ska and punk, like her friends).

--
Free Martian Whores!

Sad Reality by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 07:44 · Score: 0

The fact that people are posting links to subpar open source music production software really shows that they have no idea how powerful and well-rounded commercial music software is. It's like receiving a lecture on life from a toddler.

"Incredibly Expensive" by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 07:57 · Score: 0

Considering the cost of a laptop, microphones, speakers, MPC... it seems to me that in the making of hiphop, the beat-making software (which I think is often DAW software) is relatively inexpensive for such a critical component. I've done music for ads that you would probably recognize if you watch TV in the US, and I use Reaper, which is free to try without limitation and $60 for the base license. In contrast, my laptop and the rest of my music gear is a few thousand.

beat making software is expensive? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 08:13 · Score: 0

a few DAW can be had for under $100. hell a tracker (sequencer) + a multitrack (for vocals) can be much cheaper. like someone above said, the hardware is going to be the lion's share of the costs.

Nothing new here.. by detain · 2012-06-26 10:25 · Score: 1

Theres plenty of software out there (much of it open source) for making beats that has already been largely influenced by music artists. This is anything but news, thats like saying Windows will now be developed by people that use computers.

--
http://interserver.net/

Hip Hop stars and Professors... by Genda · 2012-06-26 11:11 · Score: 1

If we can get one to take up race car driving and the other to take up medicine, I think we can do a sequel to "Buckaroo Bonzai"!!!!

Already Exists? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 12:33 · Score: 0

Umm

http://ubuntustudio.org/
http://ccrma.stanford.edu/planetccrma/software/

Used ardor (hard disk recorder) + soft synths (hydrogen, bristol) + sequencers (seq24) to produce full (hip hop) albums in 2006 ..

this is not new..

List of available open-sourced Beat / Drum Machine by Taco+Cowboy · 2012-06-26 13:36 · Score: 4, Informative

Okay, here's the list that I can find:

Hydrogen
http://www.hydrogen-music.org/hcms/?p=main

OrDrumBox
http://www.ordrumbox.com/

OpenBeatBox
Mac
http://mac.softpedia.com/get/Audio/Open-Beat-Box.shtml
Linux
http://linux.softpedia.com/get/Multimedia/Audio/Open-Beat-Box-4095.shtml

Koblo
http://koblo.com/beta

Free Cycle
http://freecycle.redsteamrecords.com/

Anymore?

Please feel free to tag on ...

--
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !

Midget Tossing Cow Fuckers by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 13:51 · Score: 0

hip hop "artists" just steal the beats from other songs anyways, so open source or not it doesn't require any creativity.

ITS GODDAMN PULSEAUDIO & JACK + PROPRIETARY by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 18:10 · Score: 0

Been using Kubuntu as my main main desktop for the past year. Ive come a long way in getting my head around *nix.
I often help my friends with the engineering/hardware/acoustical side of their productions. Recently i have began to tweak
and investigate what linux has to offer in terms of production. I must say i have been really impressed with Linux sampler
buzztard AND lmms CONSIDERING THEY ARE FREE...

But there are two things i find that are just killing Linux production. The LINUX AUDIO MANAGERS - PULSE AND JACK
are contradictory (high vs low latency) are built for two different things and do not play nice together. Way too many headaches

Secondly with Audio there is just TOO MUCH PROPRIETARY HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE for our FOSS OS'S to support.
In Audio you often collect great 2nd hand gear at great prices. You work with what you got and its rarely supported. Example
I have a M AUDIO FIREWIRE AUDIOPHILE 2496 SOUNDCARD. IT is simply one of the most solid and best sounding cards i have
heard. I got it for $20 when my friends new PC didn't have firewire. Works Solid in Windows but thanks to its custom firmware that is
booted every god dam time you turn it on, and DOUCHEBAG M AUDIO's COLD REFUSUAL TO SUPPORT LINUX, I'm currently running
my DIGITAL EQ'ed , CROSSOVERED, TIMED DELAYED , BI-AMPED, BATTERY POWERED, TANNOY MONITORS FROM THE CRAP NOISY
MOTHERBOARD SOUNDCARD ANALOGUE OUTS. //ENDS RANT :)

Hmm by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-26 19:42 · Score: 0

Isn't the term "Hip Hop Artist" an oxymoron?

Beat Making Lab-thanks! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-29 20:12 · Score: 0

Greetings,

We're on our way to the Congo to set up our first international Beat Making Lab.

Thanks for the feedback! We've gotten so much interest, constructive criticism, and support. We are in the process of building a team to help us develop Open Beats. Please join our mailing list (openbeats@redhat.com) and let's keep the momentum going!

Subscribe here: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/openbeats

And stay connected via our website: https://www.beatmakinglab.com

Slashdot Mirror

Hip Hop Artists Developing Open Source Beat Making Software

192 comments