I was fascinated and absorbed by this piece for the first two minutes. I got goosebumps from the record static - its "almost there" quality really made me sit forward and listen in anticipation. Fire crackled and hailstones plummeted to earth. Having said this, though, I'm not sure where it would fit into a programming schedule. And I kind of felt like my son had come to me and said, "Mom, listen to what I did with your Beatles records." Innovative use of vinyl.
I quite like this piece, actually. Perhaps it doesn't belong on radio, but who cares? It's interesting, it's outside the box and I found it very enjoyable. Especially the "tidal" feeling that permeates the piece overall. I must respectfully disagree with a previous reviewer who characterized this piece as sounding like a first attempt at using ProTools or CoolEdit. While you may not enjoy this piece, you certainly have to tip your hat to the amount of work that went into it.
My only complaint is the length. As a stand alone audio piece it held my interest for about 2 minutes. Perhaps as an installation, it would be able to be played at it's full length, but as it is, my ears got tired at around 2:05
When I first started listening to this piece, my first thought was "wow!" The gradually accelerating static sound in the beginning was really engaging.
Unfortunately, the cool static-y beginning didn't turn into anything that really held my interest. (I'd thought at first it was going to turn into "rain" or "gravel," and I was wondering what that would have to do with vinyl.) After that, though, it was rather predictible and eventually I just got tired of it.
I do like this producer's more recent work. This is a piece from 1993, which I'm sure explains the indulgence.
This piece word work on an art show, perhaps, with some analysis or discussion following it.
This is a ridiculous, absurd, college freshman attempt at piecing together their first Cool Edit or Pro Tools Project. Even if it isn’t, it doesn’t much matter.
This not a homage to an old technology worthy of its place in radio history. There is no context; there is nothing interesting save a couple of few and far between vocal samples.
Why would any programmer put this on their radio station? Well, when I was at NPR, Andy T. used to say that you could air Duck Farts every day noon and someone would complain when you took it off the air. Put this in that category! Hell, I’m still wondering why the producer put it on PRX to begin with.
OK, I’m finished ranting and I do try to point out interesting things in the piece or how the piece could be improved to make it useful to programmers and stations. This one just can’t be used for any other purpose than the esoteric purpose it was commissioned for.
Maybe the producer is a genius and I am just starting with the wrong piece. I promise I will delve deeper into the producer’s work! But if you need a SFX for piece your working on...Here it is.
In February I said:
For me, the reviewer: this is the kind of thing I'm waiting around for: use of sound to unearth unexpected beauty. For programmers: if you're programming classical music, and/or serious contemporary music, you probably have listeners that remember vinyl - or younger ones that know about the difference it made. A built-in talking point. This is an hommage! Sounds like a rainstorm, sounds like a symphony of ants, sounds like: listen and see!
Notes added on 13 March 05
I recently played this piece for 12-year-old French students (fans of Hip Hop and Destiny's Child) in a sound atelier. They were fascinated -they understood instantly that there was something to listen to. I was alittle shocked by the review by the PD who wrote it off as "a first attempt at Cubase, etc." He should really know better - of course it's not made that way. It was a painstaking analog composition effort.
I understand as well as anyone else the problem of survival - and the PD doesn't have to run it -but this does not excuse highhandedly snickering at people who experiment. Especially if you're taking public funding for what is supposed to exist as an alternative medium. Public radio's quest to be above all popular usually ends in a kind of mediocrity that can't compete with the big bucks of popular entertainment. The lovely things come from going another way
Especially in this case - because it has been done with technique, substance and talent.
Also - as a reviewer - am I just patting the back of another producer? Perhaps. I listen to lots of stuff I don't review. I'm a producer too - feels like bad luck to trash someone else - so I'm a "surfacer of work" only, I guess.
Comments for Vinyl
Produced by Jonathan Mitchell
Other pieces by Jonathan Mitchell
Rating Summary
5 comments
Deborah Astley
Posted on June 10, 2005 at 11:55 AM | Permalink
Review of Vinyl
I was fascinated and absorbed by this piece for the first two minutes. I got goosebumps from the record static - its "almost there" quality really made me sit forward and listen in anticipation. Fire crackled and hailstones plummeted to earth. Having said this, though, I'm not sure where it would fit into a programming schedule. And I kind of felt like my son had come to me and said, "Mom, listen to what I did with your Beatles records." Innovative use of vinyl.
paul overton
Posted on February 21, 2005 at 07:31 AM | Permalink
Review of Vinyl
I quite like this piece, actually. Perhaps it doesn't belong on radio, but who cares? It's interesting, it's outside the box and I found it very enjoyable. Especially the "tidal" feeling that permeates the piece overall. I must respectfully disagree with a previous reviewer who characterized this piece as sounding like a first attempt at using ProTools or CoolEdit. While you may not enjoy this piece, you certainly have to tip your hat to the amount of work that went into it.
My only complaint is the length. As a stand alone audio piece it held my interest for about 2 minutes. Perhaps as an installation, it would be able to be played at it's full length, but as it is, my ears got tired at around 2:05
stacy bond
Posted on February 20, 2005 at 03:46 PM | Permalink
Review of Vinyl
Unfortunately, the cool static-y beginning didn't turn into anything that really held my interest. (I'd thought at first it was going to turn into "rain" or "gravel," and I was wondering what that would have to do with vinyl.) After that, though, it was rather predictible and eventually I just got tired of it.
I do like this producer's more recent work. This is a piece from 1993, which I'm sure explains the indulgence.
This piece word work on an art show, perhaps, with some analysis or discussion following it.
Steve Yasko
Posted on February 20, 2005 at 10:53 AM | Permalink
Do You Like Scratchn'?
This is a ridiculous, absurd, college freshman attempt at piecing together their first Cool Edit or Pro Tools Project. Even if it isn’t, it doesn’t much matter.
This not a homage to an old technology worthy of its place in radio history. There is no context; there is nothing interesting save a couple of few and far between vocal samples.
Why would any programmer put this on their radio station? Well, when I was at NPR, Andy T. used to say that you could air Duck Farts every day noon and someone would complain when you took it off the air. Put this in that category! Hell, I’m still wondering why the producer put it on PRX to begin with.
OK, I’m finished ranting and I do try to point out interesting things in the piece or how the piece could be improved to make it useful to programmers and stations. This one just can’t be used for any other purpose than the esoteric purpose it was commissioned for.
Maybe the producer is a genius and I am just starting with the wrong piece. I promise I will delve deeper into the producer’s work! But if you need a SFX for piece your working on...Here it is.
Marjorie Van Halteren
Posted on February 16, 2005 at 10:04 AM | Permalink
I can handle scratch scratch
About the piece Vinyl by Jonathan Mitchell:
In February I said:
For me, the reviewer: this is the kind of thing I'm waiting around for: use of sound to unearth unexpected beauty. For programmers: if you're programming classical music, and/or serious contemporary music, you probably have listeners that remember vinyl - or younger ones that know about the difference it made. A built-in talking point. This is an hommage! Sounds like a rainstorm, sounds like a symphony of ants, sounds like: listen and see!
Notes added on 13 March 05
I recently played this piece for 12-year-old French students (fans of Hip Hop and Destiny's Child) in a sound atelier. They were fascinated -they understood instantly that there was something to listen to. I was alittle shocked by the review by the PD who wrote it off as "a first attempt at Cubase, etc." He should really know better - of course it's not made that way. It was a painstaking analog composition effort.
I understand as well as anyone else the problem of survival - and the PD doesn't have to run it -but this does not excuse highhandedly snickering at people who experiment. Especially if you're taking public funding for what is supposed to exist as an alternative medium. Public radio's quest to be above all popular usually ends in a kind of mediocrity that can't compete with the big bucks of popular entertainment. The lovely things come from going another way
Especially in this case - because it has been done with technique, substance and talent.
Also - as a reviewer - am I just patting the back of another producer? Perhaps. I listen to lots of stuff I don't review. I'm a producer too - feels like bad luck to trash someone else - so I'm a "surfacer of work" only, I guess.