Vivaldi's Winter

DRUM MACHINE BEATS :

Songwriting is a balancing act between music and lyrics. Recently I was teaching one of my classes about Vivaldi's Winter from the Four Seasons. I was trying to articulate that the composer was able to paint a picture of Winter using only music. I then asked my students to think about why the song truly does paint a picture of winter.

Vivaldi's Winter

We talked about dissonance in the melody first. "Why would a song about Winter have intervals that create dissonance?" I said that it was because the cold of winter creates dissonance in us, as we try to brave the cold, bundle up and try to move from one warm area to the next. What about the steady four - four rhythms followed by violin flurries that last an unpredictable number of measures (actually most of them last 3 measures).

We decided that the unmeasured bursts would be the wind.The steady beats could be the sound of one of us trudging through the snow with each laborious footstep with violin flurries blowing the cold air down our throats making it hard to breathe. My favorite thought was the shivering violins in the song's most stable section. Really the most memorable part of the song. In songwriting that would be called prosody---musical sections that represent what is happening in the lyrics.

In my original band Freerider, we used a lot of prosody. We have a song called Ageless Veins, which is all about the Nashua River and some of its history. The introduction uses tapped harmonics on the guitar making a very dripping watery sound. Further in the song, the guitar solo has a whammy bar dive with delay and chorus on it which sounds like a dive to the bottom of a River. From there, the solo seems to flow very dramatically rising to climax. Like Vivaldi's Winter, "Ageless Veins" musically resembles the theme that drives the lyrics.

Do You Ever Wish YOU Had The Ability To Make REAL Hit Music Like That?

Read more

The 3 Best 1980's Female Pop Singers

DRUM MACHINE BEATS :

The 1980's were a great decade for music, and probably the first that really put the female singer front and center for a time. There were so many great female singers during this decade and while there's no doubt that the three I'll mention here were extremely successful, this list is subject to debate, as it all comes down to a matter of personal preference. I've done my best to narrow it down, but it was naturally a challenge to do so. Anyway, here's my list.

The 3 Best 1980's Female Pop Singers

3. Whitney Houston. A true diva in every sense of the word, Whitney Houston was a legendary R&B singer whose many #1 hits have gone down as 1980s classics. From more upbeat songs like "I Wanna Dance With Somebody" to slower songs like "The Greatest Love of All", Whitney belted out the high notes like no one else in the 1980s.

2. Tina Turner. This legendary singer was already a couple of decades into her career by the 1980s, but that didn't stop her from achieving enormous commercial success. Some of Tina's biggest years took place in the 1980s, and her many hits were classic 1980s music.

1. Madonna. Were you expecting anyone else? Madonna produced more chart toppers than any female singer in the 1980s, and more than any female singer in history. She truly revolutionized the concept of the female pop star, and she amazingly still produces great music over 25 years later.

While there were many others, these wonderful women make my top 3.

Do You Ever Wish YOU Had The Ability To Make REAL Hit Music Like That?

Read more

New Orleans Jazz - News and Views - Sammy Penn

DRUM MACHINE BEATS :

SAMMY PENN: Born Morgan City Louisiana September 15 1902. Died Florida September 18 1969.

New Orleans Jazz - News and Views - Sammy Penn

Let's start off a little differently this time: to me, the greatest New Orleans drummers for my pleasure were Baby Dodds, Sammy Penn and Cie Frazier. But Sammy had a wonderful second string to his bow. He sang with the same phrasing as the legendary Fats Domino, and with his big cigar and huge smile was a master entertainer.

Sammy's first job was in 1921 with Jake Johnson's band, then with Chris Kelly's Brass Band, Kid Rena's Brass Band and the legendary Eureka Brass Band. He was the mainstay of the Kid Thomas band for a quarter of a century.

You must understand that entertainment was the name of the game. With Sammy Penn and Joe "Twat" Butler, Kid Thomas Valentine had a showband. Singers, personalities and Thomas with his famous "bag of tricks" No wonder this band survived in New Orleans and then toured the world to represent the birthplace of jazz.

In a long interview with my friend Tom Stagg in his wonderful record shop "Good Rockin'" he describes Sammy Penn's drum kit as "ultra basic" A bass drum, a snare drum, a tom-tom and a cymbal attached to the bass drum. As Tom remembers, he drove the band relentlessly and with an amazing complexity of rhythmic sounds. This kit was simple but the rhythm was anything but!

This is Tom's recollection of the last weeks of his life. "Sammy returned from a doctor's appointment with the news that he had very high blood pressure and heart murmurs. Sammy played at Preservation Hall that night and after another session with the Kid Thomas Band loaded their gear on to a bus outside the Hall on St. Peters Street and set off with Sammy for a tour through Georgia to Florida. After only one concert, the bus returned to the Hall with only the driver, the road manager and the body of Sammy Penn.

Talking to Barry Martyn, he rates Sammy Penn highly in great drummers from New Orleans. Sammy played 4/4 on the bass drum and not the more familiar cut time of New Orleans drummers. George Lewis preferred that 4/4 sound and Joe Watkins played that way, but without the explosive accents and complex rhythms of Sammy Penn. Barry had the good fortune to sit in with the Kid Thomas Band and found that he could not hear himself and had to adjust his volume and style to suit the band.

So Sammy Penn was the drummer for Kid Thomas and his Algiers Stompers and spent the major part of his playing life with that band. As Barry Martyn said "When Joe James and Sammy died the band would never be quite the same again"

To hear him at his best, you should listen to "Kid Thomas Valentine Creole Jazz Band on American Music AMCD 49 and "Kid Thomas and his Algiers Stompers" on Riverside OJCCD 1833-2. My great joy is actually seeing the man in action on a DVD of the December Band produced by Big Bill Bissonnette (possibly still available by contacting him on his Jazz Crusade website - jazzcrusade.com).

Sammy Penn was a one-off and we are lucky to have records to listen to. In Australia, the late great Peter Clohesy was influenced by him and in Europe both Keith Minter, Emile Martyn and Chris Marchant show signs of having listened to this "original".

My next opus will be an interview with Les Muscutt -a superb banjo player from the U.K. who made a huge impression on the New Orleans jazz scene. Due to ill health, he retired recently and I am sure you will find his story interesting! P.S. A last minute call from Barry Martyn to say that his latest video on American Music AMVD4 will feature Kid Thomas with Sammy Penn, plus the Kid Howard band and many other good things!

Do You Ever Wish YOU Had The Ability To Make REAL Hit Music Like That?

Read more

The History of Rap and Hip Hop Music

DRUM MACHINE BEATS :

The origin of hip-hop can be traced back as far as the ancient tribes in Africa. Rap has been compared with the chants, drumbeats and foot-stomping African tribes performed before wars, the births of babies, and the deaths of kings and elders. Historians have reached further back than the accepted origins of hip-hop. It was born as we know it today in the Bronx, cradled and nurtured by the youth in the low-income areas of New York City.

The History of Rap and Hip Hop Music

Fast-forward from the tribes of Africa to the ghettos of Kingston, Jamaica in the late sixties. The impoverished of Kingston gathered together in groups to form DJ conglomerates. They spun roots and culture records and communicated with the audience over the music. At the time, the DJ's comments weren't as important as the quality of the sound system and its ability to get the crowd moving. Kool Herc grew up in this community before he moved to the Bronx.

During the late sixties, reggae wasn't popular with New Yorkers. As a DJ, Kool Herc spun rhythm and blues records to please his party crowd. But, he had to add his personal touch. During the breaks, Herc began to speak to his audience as he had learned to do in Jamaica. He called out, the audience responded, and then he pumped the volume back up on the record. This call and response technique was nothing new to this community who'd been reared in Baptist and Methodist churches where call and response was a technique used by the speakers to get the congregation involved. Historians compare it to the call and response performed by Jazz musicians and was very much a part of the culture of Jazz music during the renaissance in Harlem.

Herc's DJ style caught on. His party's grew in popularity. He began to buy multiple copies of the same albums. When he performed his duties as a DJ, he extended the breaks by using multiple copies of the same records. He chatted, as it is called in dance hall, with his audience for longer and longer periods.

Others copied Herc's style. Soon a friendly battle ensued between New York DJs. They all learned the technique of using break beats. Herc stepped up the game by giving shout-outs to people who were in attendance at the parties and coming up with his signature call and response. Other DJs responded by rhyming with their words when they spoke to the audience. More and more DJs used two and four line rhymes and anecdotes to get their audiences involved and hyped at these parties.

One day, Herc passed the microphone over to two of his friends. He took care of the turn table and allowed his buddies to keep the crowd hyped with chants, rhymes and anecdotes while he extended the breaks of different songs indefinitely. This was the birth of rap as we know it.

Hip-hop has evolved from the days of the basement showdowns to big business in the music industry. In the seventies and eighties, the pioneers and innovators of the rap record was the DJ. He was the guy who used his turntable to create fresh sounds with old records. Then, he became the guy who mixed these familiar breaks with synthesizers to produce completely new beats. Not much has changed in that aspect of hip-hop. The guy who creates the beat is still the heart of the track. Now, we call him the producer. Even though some DJs work as producers as well as DJs (quite a few start out as DJs before they become producers), today's title "DJ" doesn't carry the same connotative meaning it did in the eighties. Today's hip-hop producer performs the same tasks as the eighty's DJ.

Do You Ever Wish YOU Had The Ability To Make REAL Hit Music Like That?

Read more

16 Tips For Better Home Recording

DRUM MACHINE BEATS :

You have tried everything in the world to achieve that masterful tone on this particular riff. Have you ever thought or said, "The bass line just sounds off" or "I can't hear the snare on this like I hear it in my head".

16 Tips For Better Home Recording

If so, then welcome to the wonderful world of doing your own recordings. I've complied a few tips to share based on my own experience. Some may seem basic to you, but everyone starts at a different skill set. With that in mind, let's dig in.

1. Stop smoking. I know you're saying, "What???" Bear with me. I'm not getting on a soapbox. Recording equipment is not only expensive; it's also sensitive. Smoke congests your lines and jacks and will cause serious equipment malfunction over time, so if you need a puff, get away from your equipment and amps.

2. Tune up. You've got a hot idea and you must get it down, but take the time to tune up. You never know if that first take will spark some magical note that you want to keep and add tracks on top of, so don't belittle your effort by recording some off the wall trash tuning that can't be achieved again.

3. Prepare. Pre-plan some sessions just to tool around on the instrument, not just to record your opus. Eddie Van Halen was once noted to just jam in his home studio for 3 days. According to Sammy Hagar in 2000, there was, "at least enough material for 3 more Van Halen albums from the spare tapes alone".

4. Try writing a song or riff on an instrument you don't normally play. If you play guitar, see what you come up with on a bass. If you think you can keep time sit behind a drum kit and work out some beats.

5. Use effects made for other instruments on yours. Experiment. It may be that the sound in your head comes from a synth and can be achieved using an overdrive bass pedal through your Strat.

6. Sometimes old school works best. I know there are thousands of digital effects and recorders on the market. I also know they are extremely expensive. If you are on a budget, foot pedals are a less expensive way to create effects. Get a delay pedal and run your vocals through it. You can create a very professional sounding vocal track with it.

7. If you have access to tape, use it. 4 track recorders that use cassettes can still be found for little to nothing and cassette or reels are cheaper than hard disks. In fact, some hard disk recorders only allow a short amount of time to get everything recorded. You can fit more songs and ideas on the cassettes. I'm suggesting these to use as your "scratch pad". Work out ideas here so you don't burn up the space you have on the digital recorder.

8. Recruit friends. You can only do so much yourself. Sometimes having an extra hand is helpful. Even if they aren't musical, they can hit the record button for you so you can concentrate on the notes you want.

9. Don't settle for. A lot of the recent recording devices come with standard effects built-in. Some are fantastic, but others lack real substance. If what you have isn't what you want, use the tried and true techniques used by the pioneers of recording. Are you aware a small bathroom has outstanding acoustics? Set your amp up in there and mic it for a bombastic tone or simply record some vocals in there like thousands of others have done.

10. Mic it up. I love some direct or line in applications on various instruments and effects, but sometimes ambience is needed. Ambience will give a recording a fuller sound. Try different configurations and placements of mics on an amp. This technique works best for electric guitar amps to me. This is a personal choice, of course, but nothing compares to a live amp to me.

11. A lapel mic works wonders. One of the hardest goals in home recording is capturing a live sound. Some friends and I once recorded an entire set in our practice room just using a lapel mic (a mic like reporters use on TV) taped to the top of the room. Give it try. You never know what you might accomplish.

12. Drum tracks are beasts. Depending on the type of music that is. Now for rap and hip-hop, electronic sounding drums are desired a majority of the time and adjusting effects such as hall, reverb and ambience can change the phrasing of a loop, beat box or drum machine to exactly what the track needs. But for something like jazz or balls out rock and roll, you need a live drummer. A machine or loop will never match the precision and dynamics that a drummer can, so whenever possible get a live drummer.

13. Dumping tracks - Part A. In the previous tip I suggested using a live drummer, but let's say you live in a small apartment and the landlord just isn't going to let that happen. You can record the live drums in a sound proof area make an mp3 or put in on CD and dump that live track into your recorder, thus giving you an exceptional click track or the basis of a strong demo.

14. Dumping tracks - Part B. On some recorders you'll have more idea than you have room. When this occurs, you may have to dump some tracks together. My suggestion for this is to start with the bass and drums. You rhythm section should be the foundation of your recording, so these parts should be the first recorded and therefore the first that can be mixed together to free up another track.

15. Acoustical is exceptional. Sometimes the very basic is the very best. Two microphones are used. One for the voice and one for the guitar. Hit the record button and just let it flow.

16. Better equipment makes better sound. There's no denying this one. Anyone who's had to start with a Harmony guitar and amp will tell you. Beginner's model equipment will never take the place of the Les Paul, the Stratocaster or DW drums. Handheld 2 track recorders simply can't compete with 16 and 24 track brethren. But better equipment, 9 times out of 10, will cost much more than the starter brands, so you need a way of producing extra income.

Do You Ever Wish YOU Had The Ability To Make REAL Hit Music Like That?

Read more

Our Simulated Universe

DRUM MACHINE BEATS :

An Initial Advisory: I need to say this from the get-go, that there is no connection whatever, in this essay, postulating a simulation scenario that includes us, between a supernatural all-knowing, all-powerful creator God and what I see as a flawed flesh-and-blood creator person (or extraterrestrial) actually responsible. This 'Supreme Simulator' is no God (with a capital G), any more than the creator of a video game is a God (with a capital G). This has absolutely nothing to do with a supernaturally based religion; everything to do with the natural order and evolution of technological things. This is science (or technology); not superstition or mythology.

Our Simulated Universe

Unlike God, for those who believe in a loving God, the Supreme Simulator may not give a royal stuff about you and your fate any more than the creator of a video game cares whether the characters in that creation live happy ever after or not - probably not. I mean, if you simulated billions and billions of humans; generations and generations of them, and assuming you're not all knowing and all powerful, could you keep track of them all?

Now one is perfectly entitled to reject the truism of this simulation hypothesis. I'm not sure I really believe it myself. But of course what we believe or disbelieve is ultimately irrelevant - it's all a function of what is, or is not. While the simulation scenario is straight forward enough, being able to prove, or disprove it, is the real intellectual challenge. That's the issue I'm attempting to think through. And sadly, while I'd like to claim this as my own, the idea isn't original with me - far higher intellects than I have pondered this and there's a massive degree of literature in academic journals and web sites on the possibility.

Terrestrial Examples of Current or Near Future Simulations:

*The Practical: Simulation scenarios prove useful in dealing with everyday traffic management issues and of course the military use them for war-game purposes. Engineers use them to figure out things like will this aircraft fly if we build it this way? Can we build a bridge this way using these materials of such and such a length? It's far cheaper to simulate first - build afterward - secure in the knowledge that what you build will work. Available on the market are all manner of brands of automobile navigation simulations in virtual map form that can guide you from point A to point B without muss or fuss.

*Training: Airline pilots, air traffic controllers, astronauts, medical doctors can practice on simulators first to gain proficiency. Simulations could prove useful in driver training, before actually going out on the road.

*Scientific: Many scientists use simulations to examine 'what if'. Program these set of initial conditions; add these relationships; run for a period of time and see what happens.

*Education: One can explore the planets of the solar system; the realms of interstellar and intergalactic space; the depths of our terrestrial oceans, and other realms too where it isn't really practical or realistic to send someone in person. Data acquired by robotic probes can be translated into simulations that we all can enjoy.

*Entertainment: Video games! Quite apart from that, it's now possible to create entire feature films (note: not cartoon or animation) where all characters and all environments are 100% simulated. No filming on location; no actors need apply for the parts. There's also the tourist trade without all that messing about with airlines and hotels and taxis and suitcases and bad weather. There's all manner of virtual tourist guide packages where you can 'visit' cities and all their tourist attractions (traps).

*Role Playing: It's difficult to insert yourself into a video game, but eventually the technology might be available to do just that. The best futuristic example is the holodeck that features in the latter Star Trek incarnations.

There's one important facet of your life that's already virtual or simulated - at least in theory if not in actual practice. That is, your personal finances. I mean, we've heard of the so-called paperless office (which never really did come to pass - yet). Now we have the virtual wallet and simulated purse. I mean, your payslip or pension is deposited electronically into your account at your financial institution. You can arrange to have your standard bills paid automatically from that account; or you can go online and pay your bills yourself - electronically. You can shop online or at brick-and-mortar stores without the need to carry cash - just use your credit or debit card. You can pay your credit card bill online, or at your financial institution without any cash actually changing hands. You can even use your credit card now to get a soft drink at the vending machine!

At regular intervals your financial institution will send you a piece of paper, or you can see it online, telling you what your accounts are worth. In short, it's now possible to go through your entire financial day-to-day existence, within the entirety of your financial world, without actually having to see or handle actual cash. Money is all virtual money; financial transactions are all simulations of what used to be cash transactions.

So we see that there is nothing unusual with the simulation idea. As an aside, one should note that as little as 100 years ago, such imaginations as would postulate such activities as simulations would have either been writers of fiction or individuals consigned pretty much to the 'nice young men in their clean white coats; coming to take me away, ha-ha, he-he, to the funny farm' set! Given the exponential grown in computing crunch power, what might 100 years from now be like with respect to simulations of reality? Writers of fiction are still pretty safe in speculating; others might still be expecting visits from those 'nice young men in their clean white coats'! All too often however, futurology guesstimates ended up erring too much on the side of caution. What's sort-of expected 100 years hence often proves to be reality in a far shorter time frame. That holodeck might be closer than we think! Now, what kind of simulation might be possible of an extraterrestrial civilization a thousand, ten thousand, one hundred thousand years in technological advance of ours? A simulation of our Universe (or at least Planet Earth) to them might be as sophisticated as Pac-Man is to us.

The Supreme Simulator: Given the above examples of purpose behind simulations, what's the purpose behind a Supreme Simulator simulating us? Let's assume we're not somebody's toy - created for amusement, rather let's says our Supreme Simulator is a scientist and we're part of their 'what if' experiment. What might be simulated and in what detail?

*The Universe and all it contains to an equal degree of detail.

*The Milky Way Galaxy and all it contains to an equal degree of detail, and all that is beyond that to a far lesser extent of detail.

*Our Solar System and all it contains to an equal degree of detail, and all that is beyond that to a far lesser extent of detail.

*Planet Earth and all it contains to an equal degree of detail, and all that is beyond that to a far lesser extent of detail.

*Your immediate environment and all it contains to an equal degree of detail, and all that is beyond that to a far lesser extent of detail.

*Your mind and all it contains to an equal degree of detail, and all that is beyond that to a far lesser extent of detail except any such time as you interact with something outside of your mind's sphere.

The more detail the simulation has to include, the greater the complexity, the more crunch power is needed to run it. It stands to reason to minimise unnecessary detail, while having the flexibility to add in layers of detail as required. Some examples:

Prior to the invention of the telescope, all you needed to simulate Mars was a moving red dot in the sky. Post telescope, but pre space probes, a bit more detail in the image department was required. Once the Mariner flybys and orbiting probes and landing craft like Viking, Sojourner, Spirit, Opportunity and Phoenix, and a host of others to boot did their thing, a great more detail was required to be simulated, but of course only in those areas where the probes travelled and associated cameras pointed to.

You know there are billions of other simulated people on the simulated Planet Earth and millions of miles of simulated real estate (and tourist traps) and zillions of other simulated animated and unanimated life forms/objects inhabiting that real estate. However, you don't have anything but the vaguest comprehension of the nitty-gritty - the fine print you know not - the details are broad-brush in the extreme. Yet if the simulated you actually goes and visits some of those square miles of real estate and interacts with the natives - animal, mineral or vegetable - then the Supreme Simulator must be able to ramp up the details, and then the fine print leaps into your focus.

Maybe however the Supreme Simulator has for the simulation an unlimited capacity and everything in existence is at the maximum level of detail required, and just because you are ignorant of the landscape detail of Mars or haven't seen every brick in the Great Wall of China doesn't mean that that landscape, and those bricks, exist (in the absence of your presence) in any less detail than the landscape of your backyard and the bricks that make up your home.

In any event, assuming the Supreme Simulator isn't omnipotent and all-knowing and all-powerful then mistakes will be made. Software will need tweaking to minimise if not eliminate inconsistencies, paradoxes, contradictions, and all those nasty square pegs in round holes.

OOPS: Tweaking, Miracles, Upgrades and Patches: So say you feel like playing God and creating a universe, not a real one of course but a simulated one, on your supercomputer (which presumably has greater capacity than your wetware brain which could also create one). So, you (the Supreme Simulator) start writing the initial 'in the beginning' set(s) of software with a view to creating a Big Bang and dictating the parameters that will control the subsequent evolution of your cosmos. Of course, not being a real God, it's hard to think of everything and initially Part 'A' may not mesh totally well with Part 'B', and by the time you get to Part 'Z', everything's an absolute mess. So, you start rewriting and revising and patching things up by tweaking the software here and there so that you end up, down the track, with a cosmos that's a unified and consistent whole.

Oops #1 - Part 'A' created matter; Part 'B' you dictated and created an equal amount of antimatter, making Parts 'C' through 'Z' pretty irrelevant because your cosmos is now pretty boring - just a universe of pure energy! So, tweak #1 is to create Part 'B' but under the surface set the value to an extremely low number. You now have a matter dominated universe.

Oops #2 - In Part 'C' you create gravity along with your matter so as to keep your universe orderly and behaving in a nice clockwork way. Oops, your universe now quickly contracts and undergoes a Big Crunch - end of evolution; end of simulation. Tweak #2: create some antigravity in the form of Dark Energy to prevent that Big Crunch while allowing gravity to maintain the desired clockwork predictability.

Oops #3 - Having taken care of the macro (you've evolved your matter via gravity into planets and stars and galaxies and associated debris) in Part 'D', you now polish off the software, all the bits and pieces needed to control the micro - Part 'E'. Oops, you find that turns out not to be compatible with your macro software. Well, that apparently has no actual bearing on the other parts of your cosmic creation and since you're ultra busy dealing with 1001 other problems and issues, you don't bother to tweak this. You ignore this - no one will be any the wiser! (Oops, you didn't plan on the eventual evolution of cosmologists and quantum physicists!!)

OOPS: Why Are Miracles A Tweak? A miracle is something unexplained and unexplainable. It's a direct violation of the known laws of science. To my mind, a miracle is something that corrects a mistake; a mistake that never should have happened in the first place if the Supreme Simulator had been on the ball. For example, say you have to have a limb amputated, only at a later date it grows back! That's a miracle that corrects what presumably the Supreme Simulator hadn't counted on or programmed or desired. So, count up the number of alleged miraculous events that have been recorded over the eras of human history - that's a lot of alleged tweaks!

Why Don't I Know This? If you and everything around you (out to the farthest boundaries of the Universe) are just a simulation (created either inside the wetware mind or as software in a machine - the Supreme Simulator's supercomputer) you wouldn't know. You'd be programmed not to know or otherwise plain ignorant in the same way that the character in your dream in unaware it's a mental creation - an artefact of your mind. Ditto the characters in a video game - they don't know they are an artificial creation; an artificial life form. Since you are a simulated entity, you are not in control since you are pre-programmed and have to just go with the predetermined flow - the Supreme Simulator's puppet. You can no more control your activity than a calculator can help but calculate that the cube root of 27 is 3. Ditto the entity in your dreams does what your mind commands it to do, even if you aren't aware at the time that your mind is a puppeteer. Your dream character(s) has/have no free will in other words.

Never-the-less there may be ways to come to terms with the correctness or otherwise of the basic scenario that you are simulated and a Supreme Simulator is in control. The hint comes from the above - the need for The Boss to tweak their simulation creation to eliminate discrepancies or paradoxes, which is the same as saying there's evidence that the Supreme Simulator has failed to tweak. The fact that tweaks are necessary in our natural environment is suggestive that we are indeed in a simulation; otherwise parts of the Universe (assuming it's really real) make no real sense. Either Mother Nature screwed up, or the Supreme Simulator did.

Example: Crop circles exist. No explanation for their existence makes total sense. They are obviously made by intelligence, but Mother Nature isn't the guilty party in this case (although Mother Nature is responsible for some geometrical shapes like the spirals in some sea shells, flowers, snowflakes, etc.). No known natural force can account for crop circles. Human intelligence is the most likely explanation, but problems abound like the making of complex patterns in the dark of the night and why haven't those responsible been caught and dealt with? I could list other problems like why England and not Australia? Surely Australia has its share of pranksters. Is an extraterrestrial intelligence responsible perhaps? But what's their possible motive? I'm damned if anything rational comes to the fore. So, I think a tweak is in order here for this puzzlement has gone on far too long

As a general rule of thumb, just about anything science says is near impossible, yet for which there's some degree of credible eyewitness testimony to the contrary, might be a candidate as a quirk courteous of our Supreme Simulator! Collectively, these topics fall under a general umbrella called 'anomalies' and whole books can be read that are full of case histories. For example, your attention is directed to the many volumes compiled by William R. Corliss of anomalies culled from the scientific literature in his Sourcebook Project series. Then there are those wonderful collections of anomaly tomes penned by Charles Fort.

So why are these anomalies allowed to continue? Why hasn't the Supreme Simulator tweaked these? My best guess is that probably its because having set the simulation program in motion, and since none of the quirks are serious enough to cause the program simulation to crash, it's easier just to allow everything to run its course and not 'end program' for the sake of relatively major, but not Universe-threatening, repairs. Minor fixes, like those 'miracle' tweaks can be fixed on the run without interrupting the simulation, just like some upgrades to your computer software can take place while you work, while others don't take effect unless you shut down and boot up again. If you can soldier on and not shut down your operation and live without the upgrade(s), that's okay.

So does that mean our Supreme Simulator, The Boss, is at least 13.7 billion years old since the program running our (presumably) simulated Universe is 13.7 billion years old because it's been 13.7 billion years since the Big Bang? Not really, since there doesn't have to be any relationship between time as experienced by the Supreme Simulator and our perception of time, just like you can watch a two hour movie, but as far as the characters in the movie are concerned, perhaps two days, two weeks, two months, two years or two decades have elapsed. So, perhaps one second passing to The Boss is the equivalent of a decade going by the boards to us.

And just like watching a movie, you can speed the film up, or slow it down - even freeze frame it if you're so inclined. Now if our Supreme Simulator decided to speed up, slow down, even freeze frame (stop) the action, we wouldn't notice because all of our surroundings would be speeded up, or slowed down, or stopped by the exact same amount (which has some obvious parallels with general relativity).

What's the Best Piece of Evidence? If the Universe and all it contains; its physics (relationships, principles, laws, etc.), were created by either Mother Nature (i.e. - naturally) or via an all-knowing, all-powerful, creator God (i.e. - supernaturally), then presumably everything physics would mesh/interlock and be comprehensible, understandable, with no paradoxes, contradictions, anomalies, etc. Translated, one Universe, one set of hardware; contains just one set of unified physics, one set of software. Now your computer hardware runs on not one, but many sets of software - various functions; various sets of software. So, is the Universe like the way the Universe should be, or is it more akin to your computer programs? Unfortunately, the Universe is like your computer. The Universe's physics contains two programs; two sets of software. They don't mesh/interlock; they can not be unified; they are not compatible. Its relativity (macro) software; its quantum mechanics (micro) software and never the twain shall meet. The two are like your basic square peg in a round hole. That's a flawed creation - it's an 'Oops #3' (see above) - the work of a flawed creator, like of the flesh-and-blood kind. The sort that churns out video game programs - like a Supreme Simulator.

Apart from the above observed anomalies, our simulated Universe theory is also potentially testable. While I can think of no way to prove I'm not a simulated being, one can find evidence that we do live in a simulated universe, and by implication that we too are simulated beings. No computer software is perfect. Computer software - from our experience - is always being upgraded / updated. If the same applies elsewhere, we could perhaps notice it if we're a product of that software. So, if there are any software upgrades, they might be detectable as anomalous phenomena in some context or another. Like say one of the physical constants were tweaked and altered ever so slightly (and there is some evidence for that - the fine structure constant for example has apparently changed over astronomical time periods). If physical constants aren't - constant that is - but variable, then we got troubles with a capital T.

One of the, no, in fact THE most fundamental bedrock of all cosmology is that the physics of the universe are the same everywhere. If that's not the case, and apparently it's not seeing as how there's evidence that the fine structure constant doesn't have the same value in all parts of the cosmos, then cosmologists are forced to go back to square one. Nothing in terms of what the universe is and what governs it can now be taken anymore as gospel.

Can you really imagine either a supernatural God or a natural Mother Nature creating a cosmos where the physics therein aren't uniform? If your answer is 'no', then you are nearly forced into accepting a third alternative - the universe as we know it is a simulation by a hardly all powerful flesh and blood (supreme simulator). Since the value of the fine structure constant is critical in terms of the Universe being bio-friendly, if it's not constant, then parts of the Universe are bio-unfriendly. So our Supreme Simulator is apparently happy to create a software detailed pocket of bio-friendly universe within a far larger software un-friendly cosmos. That makes sense to create a small pocket of the simulation to be bio-friendly and just have the rest of the bio-unfriendly Universe simulated by way less sophisticated software as a sort of background wallpaper to the bio-friendly part.

The Multitudes of You: If we exist via a simulation, there of course could exist in turn more than one copy of that simulation; lots, and lots, and lots of copies. If so, there's more than one copy of you. It's a kind of parallel universe scenario. The saving grace is that you don't ever get to meet yourself!

What Are the Odds I'm A Simulated Entity? I think it's fair to say that based on the level of sophistication of my simulation scenario, you and I aren't part of a dream, or someone else's overactive imagination, nor a terrestrial computer software package. So, no terrestrial Supreme Simulator has created us. The possible exception to that observation is the assumption that the simulation that creates us is the product of the terrestrial 20th or 21st Century. Of course it's possible that our simulator is in the terrestrial 30th or 31st Century. The simulation's time period doesn't have to reflect the same time period as that of the simulator. That aside however, and assuming a non-terrestrial origin, that leaves the rest of the Universe and an extraterrestrial(s) Supreme Simulator(s).

The apparent bottom line, using Planet Earth's supposed reality as a guide, is that any one real world and real inhabitants can create, wetware and software combined, more, vastly more, nearly infinitely more, simulated worlds and inhabitants with varying degrees of complexity and duration. How many dreams (or active mentally imagined scenarios) have humanity collectively racked up? How many video games have been, are now, and will be on the market? Certainly it's way more than just one. So, one real world and just one real entity can ultimately create hundreds (maybe thousands plus) of simulated worlds and hundreds (maybe thousands plus) of simulated entities. If that logic applies to Planet Earth's supposed reality and her actual simulation (wetware and software) packages, then what of those extraterrestrial abodes and advanced civilizations? If there are hundreds, thousands, maybe millions of extraterrestrial technological advanced civilizations out there and each create hundreds, thousands, maybe millions of simulated worlds and beings, well, what odds we're one of the rare real worlds relative to the massive number of simulated ones?

Objection! We exist in a 3-D environment. Surely simulations, even dreams, are 2-D. Therefore, we're not in a simulation! Unfortunately for that argument, 2-D technology is now old hat. Well, there's now a plethora of 3-D films; 3-D TV is the latest thing. Can the 3-D Internet be far behind? Surely 3-D video games, etc. will soon be available too. Of course the Star Trek holodeck was 3-D, but that's way future technology, but who knows how quickly those advances in future technology will come. I'm sure holodeck technology, or some reasonable variation of it, will be part and parcel of our future entertainment as well as being useful in training and other role playing scenarios.

Apart from that, I'm sure the characters in computer or video games; the entities in your dreams, would, if they could, tell you that they do indeed navigate through a 3-D environment - as viewed through their senses. But wait a minute, that's something that equally applies to us. You navigate in a 3-D world, yet the actual images, or your perception of 3-D reality of that apparent 3-D environment, lies totally inside your mind and in the biochemistry of your brain. Inside your brain, that projection of reality is actually 2-D; interpretation by you however is 3-D, in much the same way perhaps as that hologram image on your credit card is 2-D, but appears 3-D. So, does that really make you any different from the video game or dream counterparts? They say they exist in 3-D; you say they are 2-D. You say you exist in 3-D, but...?

What If I Knew This? What if I knew that I and everything around me was but a simulation and I had no free will? Well, there's not a hell of a lot I or you can do about it! At best, all we can wish for is that the Supreme Simulator's wetware or software that's responsible doesn't contain any nasty surprises, or that the dreaming Supreme Simulator doesn't have an alarm clock set to go off or the temptation to press the delete button.

Free Will: If you wrote (programmed) yourself into a video game; even if you star in your own dream as a whole separate character, you're dancing to the beat of your drummer software or your drumming mind. The 'You' in your own creation, in your own dream, has no free will! If you're dancing to somebody else's tune either through their wetware dreams or software programming, you don't have any free will. Sorry 'bout that!

Ultimate Origins: Even if the simulation of our Universe / world / us is an accurate scenario, that doesn't explain the origin of the simulator(s) or of their world and universe - which may, or may not, mirror this (our) simulated one. Ultimate origins get even harder if the Supreme Simulator(s) are in turn simulations from an even more remote reality. One could well argue that if we're a simulation within a simulation within a simulation, etc., and we in turn are simulating, then the ultimate first cause is the one with the, presumably, free will - the first Supreme (flesh and blood) Simulator starts things off and all else that follows is just programming originating from him / her / it. Knowledge of such ultimate origins might be forever beyond our reach.

Wetware Versus Software: For all their sophistication - to date anyway - no one has any real difficulty in recognising virtual reality software in the form of a training exercise, a video game, or even a cinema feature 'filmed' without real actors and real background. However, the evolution in realism in such media is improving by leaps and bounds. Still, the computer software behind such simulated generations isn't yet in the same ballpark, or even the same league compared to wetware. Your dreams, nightmares, hallucinations, imaginings, etc. are very realistic indeed.

What If We Are Not Simulated? Well then its business as usual, though it still leaves scientists with a lot of hard work to do to explain the normal everyday life, the Universe and everything, with all its myriad of weird stuffs!

The Return of the Gods: Once upon a time there were many gods (Thor, Odin, Zeus, Apollo, Ares, etc.) and polytheism ruled the roost and the affairs of mortals. Unfortunately they were overthrown and monotheism became flavour of the month. That's a pity as the old gods had way more appeal - they were flawed and thus way more interesting because they were way more 'human'. Well, the gods have returned in their new form of Supreme Simulators; the writers of software and creators of video games, their associated characters and environments.

You too could be a Supreme Simulator and create your own video game. Why not? Others have done it. Not into writing software and creating brave new worlds and new life forms? Well, despite that you too can be (and have been) a Supreme Simulator - sleep, perchance to dream, and for a brief while at least create your own virtual realities.

I rest my case!

Do You Ever Wish YOU Had The Ability To Make REAL Hit Music Like That?

Read more

Go From a DJ to an Audio Mixing Engineer

DRUM MACHINE BEATS :

D.J.'s do more than just D.J. They record tracks and produce music as well. D.J.'s also get jobs with record companies to be resident D.J.'s meaning they do all of the in house D.J. music for artists on their records or they produce records for artists.

Go From a DJ to an Audio Mixing Engineer

D.J.'s who produce their own music also have built a following meaning they have been able to create a name for themselves and their fans will go to see them D.J. at a club or a show. When D.J.'s produce records for artists they make a name for themselves that way also. Building your talent and not being afraid to showcase it and take criticism will only enhance your skills.

So now that you know what it takes to be a D.J. and produce records how do you get started?

For a D.J., the natural progression after learning how to D.J., is to produce music. With the digital age well upon us the price of music production software is coming down and the flexibility and quality going up you can literally create radio ready music in your bedroom and executives from the record companies will never even know it.

Here is a list of the things you need for your home recording equipment.

1. Master Software Program - Depending on your choice this is what all of your other hardware and software components will be based on. I have put some recommendations of programs further down the page. Example of a type of master software program is Pro Tools. Pro Tools allows you to record multiple tracks, mix your song and master your final mix using the suite of plug-ins that come with Pro Tools so there is no need to buy additional gear to do this.

2. Audio Card - This card is a crucial piece of hardware because you can not get audio into computer without it. A good audio card to consider is one that has a processor on it like the kind of processor found on your computers motherboard only smaller. One that I like is the ST Audio 2496 PCI Audio Card. It uses very little of your computer's CPU (Central processing Unit).

3. Mixer - If you have D.J. equipment then you have a mixer. Use your mixer or multi-track to plug into your audio card.

It can be an analog or digital mixer but preferably a digital mixer. For my home recording I use the Roland VS880. It is old but still very effective. You can also plug directly into your audio card from a source such as a CD player. Break Out Boxes are your best bet if you only a have a few inputs. What ever your source is they should run through a mixer or breakout box first. A breakout box is essentially a way to connect multiple sources into a single source that you would feed your audio card then to the input of your audio card. Whatever your source is they should run through a mixer or breakout box first and then to the input of your audio card.

4. CD Burner - What is the point of recording to your computer if you cannot burn the final product to CD? Just about every computer comes with one nowadays. Even some of the newer D.J. equipment comes with a CD burner. Most computers come with a CD burner but if you want an external CD burner you should get Plextor PX-740UF which doubles as a DVD burner.

5. Midi Card - If you use Musical Instrument Digital Interface or MIDI for short then you will most definitely need a midi interface card for your computer or an external MIDI interface. This is an essential part of your recording process because it allows you to sync many different instruments that use Time Code or The Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE for short).

Time code or SMPTE is basically a hidden track that records the beats per minute (BPM). When this time code is recorded with the BPM then other devices such as beat machines or keyboards are able to read the time code and play back in sync with each other without getting off beat. Time code helps keep all of your musical devices in sync for recording. SMPTE is really used in the movie industry to sync music tracks to video.

By having this capability you can compose and arrange you music using several different instruments and have them play in time with one another while being controlled the multi-track machine's MIDI. A good midi card to get is the Echo Mia Midi Digital Audio and Midi Card.

6. Drums Sounds - In the past drum sounds have been the hardest part to create for tracks. Drum loops have come a long way and for home recording it has been simplified to a few clicks of the mouse.

Now with pre-made drum loops and samples it is just a matter of inserting it where you want it and the recording software will line them up so it sounds perfect. Soon D.J. equipment will have MIDI.

7. Main Software Program - With the main software program you want to get it right the first time because this will be the mother program. Some of the programs can be a bit pricey but you will not be changing to any other programs for a few years. Just like you made the investment in your D.J. equipment do the same with your recording software.

These programs come highly recommended.

o Image Line FLStudio Producer Edition Windows (Remix / Looping) for recording

o Propellerhead ReBirth for recording

o Sony Media Sound Forge 8.0 for recording

o Stanton Final Scratch for your D.J. software

o Steinberg CubaseSX3 MAC/PC (Multi-Track Recording Software) for recording

o Serato Scratch Live from Rane for your D.J. software

o Pro Tools for recording Music123.com is a great place to pick up any one of these products.

Now to be honest you probably will not learn these software programs overnight. But as you learn to drop tracks and do different mixes of the same songs you will grasp a good understanding of the programs. Read up on the message boards for tips. They are a great source of information.

8. Studio Monitors - You need at least a 500 watt amp and studio monitors.

Studio monitors are speakers specifically designed for professional recording studios in order for the studio's audio engineer to mix the music that you eventually hear on your CD or iPod. But these are not your normal speakers they are especially designed to give a flat response, meaning the dynamic range is zero. Normal speakers will give that rich sound you are used to hearing. A good pair of studio monitor are TANNOY I own myself) and a good pair of speakers for normal use are Yamaha C115V 15 2 Way Club Concert Series Speaker.

Another thing about monitors and mixing is that it will take several months to get used to mixing music using these monitors because what you hear is different from what will play back in a normal speaker. Every time you do a mix play it back on a normal stereo system and you will be able to tell what parts of a mix need to be adjusted.

To me being able to mix is a highly developed skill more so than being a D.J. Having a critical ear is precious and being able to bring that together with your D.J. creativity only makes you stand out all the more.

Finally in the process is mastering which involves taking the final mix and tweaking it by a means of compression and EQ or balance to give it full dynamic range with the highest output without distortion. You may have noticed that your homemade CD sounds nothing like your favorite CD. That's because it has not gone through the mastering process.

This is a skill that only a few people in the recording industry have. But thanks to the power of the computer you can achieve the same level of a final master as the big boys. So get your D.J. equipment out, drop a track and start mastering.

Do You Ever Wish YOU Had The Ability To Make REAL Hit Music Like That?

Read more