Dubstepforum.com

I guess I have to take that back, I have heard Rustie before, probably during mixes and stuff. All 3 of those tunes are 10x better and more original than any Timbaland I've ever heard. I especially dig Joker, Silkie and the like, so yeah, I would say Rustie is definitely tight.

You have to understand why I think these young English guys are more interesting producers than Timbaland -- they are trying to hash out something new for art's sake while Timbaland is trying to convince easily manipulated teenagers that he is cool with the help of nothing less than a marketing army. They have different goals in mind and that comes across in their product.

That Spliff Dub remix I've been wanting to know who made it for a long ass time and now I finally know so thanks!

no prob!

thing u have to remember tho, is that in the mid to late 90's timbo was the young kid with fresh, different ideas... sure he's really mainstream now, but he changed hip hop/r&b forever... apples and oranges, cheers man

For the record Timbaland is one of my favourite producers and I have definitely dropped his instrumentals in my sets in the past, and have definitely heard others drop them too.

I actually like some of the stuff I have heard so far from Rhianna's new album.

People shouldn't be so scared to admit to liking something that is deemed mainstream.

plastician wrote: People shouldn't be so scared to admit to liking something that is deemed mainstream.

for real. So sick of the "everything mainstream is bad, everything underground is good" mentality

Okay, I'm not sure all of his tunes are terrible, that would be an ignant thing to say b/c i havent heard all his tunes. but the ones I have heard don't do anything for me.

Also, I don't personally judge a tune by how many people I can make dance with it, I judge by what kind of tinglies it gives my brain. I know that part is definitely a matter of preference and depends on what your end goal is.

If I get super wasted I'll occasionally catch myself dancing to some Top 40 b.s.

I just think as a society we should strive to have higher musical goals than "Sexy Back."

Its not a perfect world but I can be allowed to dream, right?

One last thing about mainstream music (hopefully). Having listened to thousands of songs in a 10 year span of being seriously into music, I've noticed certain motifs/patterns/devices/methods that top-selling producers consistently share in their music, which include:

-repetition at a hypnotic level
-basic, uncomplicated rhythms
-basic, familiar instrumentation or samples
-use of popular urban language / samples
-sex appeal of singer / group
-usage of song structure & chord progression themes similar to pre-existing top-selling songs
-seamless production
-backed by a huge marketing department

Now yes, it is a talent to be able to combine all those things into 1 song. Its also a talent to sell life insurance and used toasters. Its a talent to create a line of t-shirts with shiny fake jewels all over them and convince people that its not retarded to wear them. Selling Scientology auditing sessions is a talent, and making FM friendly music is also a talent.

I know, "Hey relax its just music its not hurting anybody." I dunno, I think people are kind of giving up their mental sovereignty when they decide that music essentially designed to brainwash (keep listeners on the station through the commercial break) is good simply because it is on the radio. And therefore it must have cred. That's simply not true. Your brain is being manipulated for somebody's commercial gain.

If you truly like that kind of stuff, I promise to stop being a jerk about it, just don't expect me to like it too. I've had this corn kernel shell stuck in my gums for the past 3 days and its been driving me mental, so I apologize if I actually upset anybody.

too funny

gigi wrote:Blame Chase & Status. They produced the tune and a few other cuts on her new album. I'd call this dubstep lite. Lol.

i feel like they just raped dubstep hardcore...it hurts. especially to know that my preteen neices and grandma are going to be jammin to the "new hip sound".

The only way shitty dubstep tracks "ruin dubstep" is when you make them into a huge deal instead of ignoring it and saying to yourself "that's shit" and moving on. The new producers/mainstream artists/whatever else is "ruining dubstep" isn't ruining anything, it's ruining dubstep for YOU because you take it to heart so deeply and allow it to ruin the music you truly enjoy. So congrats, you've all ruined dubstep for yourself. Go create your own genre, never let anybody hear the songs, and bump it silently in your headphones until you're on your deathbed.

I've signed up solely to tell Cyrusfx that your rejecting popular music so intensely that its gone full circle and you look like a narrow minded fool.

You clearly care too much about the image of music when really its just a collection of sounds and melodies that you either like or dislike. Why don't you actually boil down what kind of sound your brain gets 'tickled' by and stop this instant tribal dislike for stuff that has even the slightest bit of mainstream popularity.

There is a reason why we have a fairly eclectic national radio over here and ironically you have just highlighted why you do not.

cyrusfx wrote:One last thing about mainstream music (hopefully). Having listened to thousands of songs in a 10 year span of being seriously into music, I've noticed certain motifs/patterns/devices/methods that top-selling producers consistently share in their music, which include:

-repetition at a hypnotic level
-basic, uncomplicated rhythms
-basic, familiar instrumentation or samples
-use of popular urban language / samples
-sex appeal of singer / group
-usage of song structure & chord progression themes similar to pre-existing top-selling songs
-seamless production
-backed by a huge marketing department

Two things:

You could apply all of this to Motown or Prince as well...none of that makes it bad music or even uninteresting music.

Almost none of that applies to Timbaland when he broke through.

this convo just got real complicated. Rustie has def replaced timbaland as my fav producer. lol j/k. actually rustie has been my fav producer since "play doe" dropped last year.

cloak and dagger wrote:

Two things:

You could apply all of this to Motown or Prince as well...none of that makes it bad music or even uninteresting music.

Almost none of that applies to Timbaland when he broke through.

A lot of motown isn't very good. You only are hearing the classics, and that was when pop music was still in its commercial adolescence. A lot of the overly-commercialized Motown you'll never hear because they were made to be one-hit wonder-type productions and to sell radio commercials. But yes, a lot of the same principles apply to that music because it was commercially exploitable.

Music and its commercialization has evolved in ways nobody could have possibly imagined since then so comparing today's music to Motown doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

And a lot of Prince sucks ass, IMHO.

I remember hearing a song in 7th grade by Timbaland and somebody else where they sampled the Knight Rider theme and rapped over it. It was extremely repetitive but I didn't care because I was too young to have developed tastes and I thought it was inherently cool because it had the Knight Rider theme. That was the last time I liked Timbaland.

I'm sure some of his beats are good, but I can't forgive him for some of his past output. I honestly believe "Sexy Back" is one of the worst, most offensive pieces of crap I've heard in a long time. That's just my opinion, though.

cyrusfx wrote:

cloak and dagger wrote:

Two things:

You could apply all of this to Motown or Prince as well...none of that makes it bad music or even uninteresting music.

Almost none of that applies to Timbaland when he broke through.

A lot of motown isn't very good. You only are hearing the classics, and that was when pop music was still in its commercial adolescence. A lot of the overly-commercialized Motown you'll never hear because they were made to be one-hit wonder-type productions and to sell radio commercials. But yes, a lot of the same principles apply to that music because it was commercially exploitable.

Music and its commercialization has evolved in ways nobody could have possibly imagined since then so comparing today's music to Motown doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

And a lot of Prince sucks ass, IMHO.

I remember hearing a song in 7th grade by Timbaland and somebody else where they sampled the Knight Rider theme and rapped over it. It was extremely repetitive but I didn't care because I was too young to have developed tastes and I thought it was inherently cool because it had the Knight Rider theme. That was the last time I liked Timbaland.

I'm sure some of his beats are good, but I can't forgive him for some of his past output. I honestly believe "Sexy Back" is one of the worst, most offensive pieces of crap I've heard in a long time. That's just my opinion, though.

Ah yeah, I forgot you know exactly how much Motown I've heard.


And even if you were correct, it doesn't negate my point at all.


You seem like a barrel of fun by the way. Must be the life of the party.

this track is horrible even by pop standards

That Spliff Dub remix I've been wanting to know who made it for a long ass time and now I finally know so thanks!

Jesus man, where you been?

this is huge though:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T79dkJBCHyM

Whatever happens happens.

So rihanna performed this song at the American Music Award's bros what do you think of that??

cloak and dagger wrote:

Ah yeah, I forgot you know exactly how much Motown I've heard.


And even if you were correct, it doesn't negate my point at all.


You seem like a barrel of fun by the way. Must be the life of the party.

What _was_ your point?

My point was that many songwriters who produce music meant for radio play (from the 50s to now) employ specific compositional techniques in order to make the listener feel comfortable so that they won't change the station and will listen through the commercial break (ie, brainwashing techniques).

A lot of Motown is very repetitive, just as a lot of modern radio music is very repetitive. Some of it was too repetitive and the public was able to figure out when they were being fooled. Which is how a lot of "one-hit-wonders" came to be.

I know I'm not the first person to associate repetition in music with brainwashing:

The technique of Revivalist Preachers – Repetitive Music

“Repetitive music will be played while the people come in for the
service. A repetitive beat, ideally ranging from 45 to 72 beats per
minute (a rhythm close to the beat of the human heart), is very
hypnotic and can generate an eyes-open altered state of consciousness
in a very high percentage of people. And, once you are in an alpha
state, you are at least 25 times as suggestible as you would be in
full beta consciousness.”

This is an interesting article about statistical commonalities between lyrics of best-selling pop songs:

http://www.jillrobbins.com/tech/HypnOpenTxPS.pdf