But then wouldn't that make you the King, Nick? Oh wait, now it's me...I mean....What the...????

King chas (for the moment)

Donny, what do you expect when you answer your own question in your opening post. So, for YOU, it ended right there.

chas

LOL

Let's show a little respect, folks...Donny's a real Pro...just ask him!

R.

Personally, I admire Donny's attitude and open minded approach, and I wish I had more of it myself.

It's nice to see someone so enthusiastic about his music, and it's also nice to see someone brave enough to think outside the box.

I, for one, would definitely go to see one of his performances.

Way to go, Donny...you have the testicular fortitude and confidence to be able to do what you love whilst earning a living.

Ian the Impressed



------------------
Bring back the Chord Sequencer!

Is making a recording cheating?
(you don't have to answer that!)
What I mean is: making a recording is often playing it many times and edit it untill it is right ("assembling") - in this digital era even notes are changed afterwards, like recording a midi-file and correcting notes and correct the timing. Singers are even corrected with plug-ins (auto-tune), etc.
So what IS cheating anyway.
When I play "The Love Boat" on my PSR3K, I play the melody, the chords and I programmed the counter-melodies (Multipads) plus I have to hit the multipadbuttons in time. But I did not make the accompaniment and the intro and outro - so am I a cheat?
I don't think so, but I do show that I am NOT playing during the intro and outro.
drdalet.

[This message has been edited by drdalet (edited 07-11-2007).]

Why not mute the lead parts during the intro and still keep playing?

And all I believe 'cheating' is, is giving your audience less that YOUR best. By whatever means necessary...

But using backing parts that you COULD have played, IMO, that's cheating your audience. Just play as much as you can, as well as you can, and your audience will recognize it every time...

As to recording 'cheating'... Well, unless you state specifically that you recorded 'live' in one take, no-one expects that.

Were Les Paul and Mary Ford 'cheating'? Was Sgt. Pepper's 'cheating'? Was Glen Gould's first Goldberg Variations 'cheating'? (THAT one is still being debated!)

I kind of feel for this issue a bit, though, because my duo sells a CD we recorded 'live' at our house gig, but because of the nature of arrangers and SMF's, I was able to record us live on several different days to an ADAT. This allowed me to fly the tracks into the computer, and line them up virtually sample accurate, because the tempos were the same each time!

So I was able to take the rhythm guitar parts from different days, and pan them out to the corners, and have double tracked rhythm guitar (when the song sounded good with it), and have a choice of different solos, from myself and my guitarist, to choose from, and pick the best one for each song, and sometimes a little doubled harmony.

Now, does this still qualify as a 'live' recording? Because every note WAS recorded live, in one go, but then assembled from the live recordings afterwards...

No easy answers, I guess, but we don't bill it as a 'live album, but we DO say it was recorded at the house gig...

But it was a neat way to do the job, and I think we're doing the next one the same way.

Diki
Do you pay royalties on the songs you record and sell? Do you buy your midi files from the net?
I know how you feel about stealing (sampling). So with such strong opinions I would expect you to be above reproach in every aspect of your musical ethics.

Mike,

Diki did state that he paid his dues. Excerpt from The Sampling (copyed) Bar:

Diki quotes:

"However, my duo DOES have a CD for sale of us playing live, we sell it on the gig. Each and every tune on that CD is cleared with the copyright holders, and we pay a fee to the rights societies for the use of those tunes...."

Taike