One Sample Dare #11 Voting

[MetaDronos]

One Sample Dare #11 Voting

This is the poll for One Sample Dare Challenge #11

Voting is open for one week.

Vote for a member who you think has created the best entry.

You can vote for more than one track.


Submitted entries:

AstroAndMusic "Tunnel To Hades"
http://soundcloud.com/cosmiclettuce/tunnel-to-hades



Jaspo "The Devil's Machine"
http://soundcloud.com/codehead/the-devils-machine



MetaDronos "Enremuanno"
http://soundcloud.com/metadronos/enremuanno



remst8 "Turbine v0.40"
http://soundcloud.com/remst8/turbine-v0-40



Subdream "Beautifully Fragile"
http://soundcloud.com/subdream/beautifully-fragile-osd-mix



Under the Net "Slaughtered"
http://soundcloud.com/under-the-net/slaughtered



xalpheon "Sins Of Afterlife"
http://soundcloud.com/xalpheon/sins-of-afterlife

[S1gnsOfL1fe]

It's going to be a seriously stiff contest this time around. So many amazing entries!

Best of luck to all of you. :rockon:

Cheers,
-S1gns

[remst8]

You said it, S1gns! Voting was very challenging for me, because I pretty much love all of 'em. :hypnotized:

[GaryG]

Particularly like how people are taking advantage of the fact that the rules don't specify it has to be an ambient track...

But, yeah, excellent stuff all round.

[Ciberithm]

Particularly like how people are taking advantage of the fact that the rules don't specify it has to be an ambient track...

But, yeah, excellent stuff all round.

A bigger concern form me is the use of very short samples loaded into a sampler that can use the loaded waveform as an oscillator. If you take very short slices, i.e. one sample, and rearrange them, you can produce any desired waveform. That may be creative, but certainly outside the spirit of the contest.

I'm glad to see an increase in participants, and think the rules should probably remain loose for now. So let's keep the great entries coming. I'm looking forward to our first Dub-Death-Metal-Disco ambient entry. :D

[GaryG]

A bigger concern form me is the use of very short samples loaded into a sampler that can use the loaded waveform as an oscillator. If you take very short slices, i.e. one sample, and rearrange them, you can produce any desired waveform. That may be creative, but certainly outside the spirit of the contest.

I pondered this a while back after a Soundcloud comment on someone's entry saying pretty much the same.

I'm kind of open on the subject; personally I like trying to incorporate the sounds of the original sample into the piece, keeping them recognisable but taking the sample apart at a 'molecular' level to create new tones is just as creative in my book. I guess you do then have the responsibility of using these new tones to create something sympathetic to the original sample.

Or not.

[S1gnsOfL1fe]

A bigger concern for me is Xalephon's entry this round is eerily close to my name...Sins Of Afterlife could easily be taken as reference to my future self...and that track paints a bleak picture indeed. Time to change my ways! :whiteflag::cool:

All jokes aside...I think we should actually propose this question to Metadronos since this is his contest. He originally thought of the idea and is the one keeping it going. I know he'll have some thoughts on the matter and his opinion is one I value here.

My 2 cents would be this: One of the "rules" of the contest that I feel has been lost is the final rule, #8 which is "The winner SHOULD disclose the winning formula for the rest of the group." Personally, I'm fine with microscopic samples as long as Ciberithm mentioned, they stay true to the spirit of the contest AND the winners share how they arrived at that place, using pictures, a detailed description, or a short youtube video.

Cheers,
-S1gns

[MetaDronos]

I think we should actually propose this question to Metadronos since this is his contest. He originally thought of the idea and is the one keeping it going. I know he'll have some thoughts on the matter and his opinion is one I value here.

My 2 cents would be this: One of the "rules" of the contest that I feel has been lost is the final rule, #8 which is "The winner SHOULD disclose the winning formula for the rest of the group." Personally, I'm fine with microscopic samples as long as Ciberithm mentioned, they stay true to the spirit of the contest AND the winners share how they arrived at that place, using pictures, a detailed description, or a short youtube video.

Cheers,
-S1gns

Hi,

I think it is no problem to use small sample fragments to use them as oscillators - but it would be nice to keep something from original sample spirit, as GaryG said. But this is not strict rule.

About rule #8 - many participants describe their entries when posting them.
Maybe we could add the following rule: "Participants SHOULD describe their entries". In such case more interesting knowledge, tricks and techniques will be revealed during every new contest edition.

[Under the Net]

Well, I use a lot Camel Audio products in my ambient work, especially Alchemy. This is such a powerful beast, and in a good hands (not mine!) can produce anything, just listen to Alchemy banks, Patchpool or Yuroun Sound Design banks! I'm afraid that with synth/sampler complex like that (and many others) original sample isn't that important (if you know what you doing).
Rule "to keep something from original sample spirit" seems like good idea. Unfortunately my entry is something mostly opposite this time!

[Ciberithm]

Well, I use a lot Camel Audio products in my ambient work, especially Alchemy. This is such a powerful beast, and in a good hands (not mine!) can produce anything, just listen to Alchemy banks, Patchpool or Yuroun Sound Design banks! I'm afraid that with synth/sampler complex like that (and many others) original sample isn't that important (if you know what you doing).
Rule "to keep something from original sample spirit" seems like good idea. Unfortunately my entry is something mostly opposite this time!

If you only use the granular engine or sample playback in Alchemy, then it is an acceptable and awesome tool. You just can't use the VA oscillators. When doing granular synthesis, if you choose a small enough sample and scan through the original sample for a suitable starting point, you can reproduce almost any single cycle oscillator waveform. I always use a sample of at least several milliseconds and have the start position move forward through the sample as it plays. Some of my longer pad sounds have been made by running a granularized sample through delays and reverbs, re-sampling the output, and then loading that back into a granular synth engine.

Please don't take this dialog as being directed towards your entry. I very much enjoyed it, and I guess others did as well, as you are one of the leaders in the voting.

[Under the Net]

Ciberithm, thank you, I used granular synthesis this time.

[Subdream]

It was not my intention to raise concerns by creating the "offending" entry, as well as I did not want to take advantage of any unwritten agreements. I'm really sorry if I did unwittingly. I am aware that my track is different and was a little reluctant to enter it in the first place (until one of those "what the heck" moments, sorry about that =).
I consider the Psybient genre to be part of what is called "Ambient Music", but if the consensus here is that this is not the case, then please remove the track.

[S1gnsOfL1fe]

It was not my intention to raise concerns by creating the "offending" entry, as well as I did not want to take advantage of any unwritten agreements. I'm really sorry if I did unwittingly. I am aware that my track is different and was a little reluctant to enter it in the first place (until one of those "what the heck" moments, sorry about that =).
I consider the Psybient genre to be part of what is called "Ambient Music", but if the consensus here is that this is not the case, then please remove the track.

Absolutely not! As the owner of the forum and as some would say, a psybient producer myself, the track stays...indefinitely!

The issue here isn't about genre, so please don't feel like yours wasn't "in the spirit" of this contest. Quite the contrary actually. Everyone here realizes your entry was legitimate and there was no "unwritten" agreements anywhere. What's humorous is that that is contest has actually brought out our competitive sides...anyone who has been following it from the beginning can see that. If anything, it's good to see issues like this come up so we can resolve them among us rather than leaving feelings of those who are participating go unresolved.

As to your track, personally...I think it's amazing. I do hope you keep entering these contests because #1, your music is good and #2...you're a talented producer and bring some really stiff competition. ;)

Cheers,
-S1gns

[GaryG]

It was not my intention to raise concerns by creating the "offending" entry, as well as I did not want to take advantage of any unwritten agreements. I'm really sorry if I did unwittingly. I am aware that my track is different and was a little reluctant to enter it in the first place (until one of those "what the heck" moments, sorry about that =).
I consider the Psybient genre to be part of what is called "Ambient Music", but if the consensus here is that this is not the case, then please remove the track.

I think your entry is totally valid (I voted for it :D), my comment about people "taking advantage" was 100% sincere, no sarcasm or anything at all. A couple of times during these contest I've come up with something really abrasive (industrial I guess) but dithered over whether I should enter them. You're an AO iconoclast!

I guess a rule about the 'spirit of the original sample' is bound to cause more confusion and debate, as would a rule indicating allowed genres (look at the debates already about what 'ambient' is... ) Ultimately, I see little difference between creating something from single waveforms or using a larger sample then making it unrecognisable with paulstretch, filters, reverb etc etc. Maybe we want to make this into an 'Art of Noise' challenge where you can only use recognisble chunks of the sample with no processing at all.

Maybe we need to trust the voters more; rely on them to see the creative merit of a track, can we assume if you're listening to the entries in an AO challenge then you'll be drawn to the more ambient tracks anyway...?

[Subdream]

*cough* Looks like a slight case of overreacting on my side. Maybe the finer details of the english language still elude me. But reading "taking advantage" - a phrase with a distinct negative flavour, or so i thought - just triggered my defenses. Funny thing is, normally (at least in the virtual world) I would just walk away when something like this happens...

Gary, sincere thanks for clearing this up. Sorry I got you wrong. S1gns, thank you for the reassurement.

(whoa, this is embarrassing. Time to walk away... for the moment. =)