Dubstepforum.com

I'm currently working on my final project in high school, and I have to write a long thesis. I'm trying to find out what's so appealing about the sound of crackle/hiss/static, which is a fundamental part of the aesthetic of producers like Burial, Pole, and Nicolas Jaar.

Any idea why we perceive these sounds as pleasant? It would be great to get some opinions on this, since I've found it kinda hard to find any usefull sources on the internet haha.

Because they imply use, functionality, dirt, and "realness."

In a sense it's like the weathering they apply to spaceships in sci-fi movies post-Star Wars to make them look grungy and used.

It is mostly to imitate vinyl hiss and pops, producers like burial and owsey etc use it to give a sense of nostaligia...listening to records on a rainy day sort of thing

the question really should be why people wouldnt find them pleasant, that would be much more interesting

JTMMusicuk wrote:It is mostly to imitate vinyl hiss and pops, producers like burial and owsey etc use it to give a sense of nostaligia...listening to records on a rainy day sort of thing

the question really should be why people wouldnt find them pleasant, that would be much more interesting

Well I think crackle and static are generally seen as unpleasant, most people are trying to get the cleanest sound possible when recording/mixing etc (in mainstream music)

Yeah I think a lot of it comes down to nostalgia, yet there are a lot of kids from my generation who probably haven't ever owned a vinyl record and still get drawn to that sound for some reason... interesting

replace the word "youtube" in a youtube link with "vinylcrackle"
???
magic.flv

Pink noise for example sounds very natural. Because it's equally 'loud' at every frequency.
This kind of sound is also heard a lot in nature. Like with wind or streaming water.
It's a relaxing sound to a lot of people. I believe it can even help to mask tinnitus.

Maybe you could also write something about psychoacoustics?
I have notes on the subject but it's mostly about sound localization / stereo perception etc..

You can become a fan of certain aesthetic qualities or inherent artefacts in different audio mediums really easily. There are many artists who exploit this intentionally.

For example with vinyl.

Crackle off vinyl I guess is a very easy one for people to enjoy. As far as unwanted noise goes it's not very harsh to listen to. It also suggests historical content to the music, nostalgia and makes the listener think of their own experiences with records.Even with listener having no connection to vinyl it will still is a sound that will make people think of something being old or of a damaged quality as it as a form of noise is very much developed in that way.It's also a very natural analogue form of noise that's also very unpredictable. It's very warm and easy to listen to as a result of this.

However really the matter is it's just another sound. Even regardless of meaning noise from devices can be pleasing to the ear or interesting to use.

It can even go as far as using the sounds of cds skipping as a compositional tool. Like this:


But yeah as said noise comes in many forms. The pink noise example is an example of one that can have an impact on the listener with no concious relationship to anything else.

i can only say why i enjoy it

it's a warm sound

..reminds me of gentle crackling fire/candlelight

you could argue that the imperfections presented by crackle/hiss/lo-fidelity resonate with people because of the inherent imperfections in being a human. the imperfections/failings are easier to relate to than perfect, machine-like precision.

AxeD wrote:Pink noise for example sounds very natural. Because it's equally 'loud' at every frequency.
This kind of sound is also heard a lot in nature. Like with wind or streaming water.
It's a relaxing sound to a lot of people. I believe it can even help to mask tinnitus.

Maybe you could also write something about psychoacoustics?
I have notes on the subject but it's mostly about sound localization / stereo perception etc..

Yeah I will also cover some psychoacoustic elements?
Could you send me your notes by any chance? And are they in Dutch?

Nope English. I only have them in writing, but I'll see what I can find.

This book is pretty much the bible of modern Psychoacoustics research:

http://www.amazon.com/Music-Cognition-C ... 0262531909

alphacat wrote:This book is pretty much the bible of modern Psychoacoustics research:

http://www.amazon.com/Music-Cognition-C ... 0262531909

thanks

Nice post by wolf. So glad that fuck got banned. Cannot have input like that around here.

--

Static, vinyl crackle, I like irrespective of nostalgia, I think. I just like the sound. I like the sound of aspen leaves in breezes. The sound is just full, with modulations, there is just a lot there to listen to, a bed of sound to lie into. It is like being tickled in and around your ear. It is aesthetic pleasure, something very hard to formulate into concrete boringness.

When producing I often use a few layers of sound/ambiance/crackle/hiss to achieve the sound I want.

Like in this track, there is a layer of hiss over everything, setting the music back from the listener. It creates a kind of disengagement. Nostalgia is similar, in that you are kind of disengaged from the present, in reflection of a semi-real past. The feeling when listening to this is similar in terms of the disengagement, but not necessarily in favor of a past, a more kind of generalized non-presentness.

Soundcloud

Reminds me of a rap beat I made ages ago, I added in a crackle sound to the intro to make it sound 'fuller'. I think it has a nostalgic quality to it, and people love nostalgia.

Listening to records, creating a mood. It's like people who use Rainmind.com.

Is this for an Extended Essay by any chance? I was doing music, but that shit is difficult to write 4000 words about.

wolf made a good point, but I doubt many producers have that in mind. I believe it has more to do with aesthetics than anything else; trying to invoke a certain nostalgia for records, tapes, analog sounds etc in a mostly digital age (though this type of retro fetishism isn't exclusive to music).

Personally, I'm not really a fan. Some people can pull it off, but I much rather go for a cleaner sound. And it's becoming more and more of a gimmick.

For me, I like it, it gives off an "organic" vibe to me, like it sounds more real and natural (guess it's tied to many nature sounds), and I much prefer organic music to overly electronic tunes. I also often don't like polished productions, it gives it a sense (manufactured or not) of some sort of rawness.

Nostalgia is a weird one, especially when there's going to be a whole generation of music listeners that have never listened to anything "worse" than a cassette.

I think it can also be used to hide perceived imperfections in the artist's work. I know I've used in parts that I'm really self-conscious about, like people are going to notice that something's shit if there isn't something filling the space.

cloquet wrote:you could argue that the imperfections presented by crackle/hiss/lo-fidelity resonate with people because of the inherent imperfections in being a human. the imperfections/failings are easier to relate to than perfect, machine-like precision.

This is why I dig it. Just the 'imperfection' of it. It's not that I can relate to it better than 'perfection', just that it's a break from perfection, which is most electronic music. Soo ehh yeah, it's a little change up from what I'm used to. Always nice.

Digital imperfection can be just as pleasing. Like Actress using low bitrates as a compositional tool or Oval basing their music on software glitches. In fact, when I first started downloading music, I had no idea what the 64/128/256 meant and I just assumed it wouldn't make a difference to my ears anyway (was like 12). So I got into a bunch of underground hip-hop tunes sounding really shitty and muffled and it added to the vibes (ripped from dirty vinyl at 64 kbps). Wasn't too long until I noticed the numbers stood for quality, though. But those tunes still sounded better to me all shitty and muddy than totally clean.

Just my 2 cents....

Something I have noticed about the use of "artificial" crackles is that the volume of the crackle itself tends to be quite loud compared to a real crackle with regards to the overall record volume.

This gives the weird effect of the music feeling quite distant and quiet despite the volume you may be playing it at.....for me it's about the relativity of the sound with regards to other sounds around it, and I think this has some weird profound effect.
Dunno if anyone else feels the same way, I just saw lots of posts about nostalgia and stuff and I am not sure I buy that argument tbh.