It's all back Pete Tong (new Underworld - Electronic Part One))

jose m · #1 10-22-2005, 04:34 AM

nice one,not enough of those around.

the mongoose · #2 10-22-2005, 04:57 AM

Sometimes.....just sometimes...the vocoder thing works (usually on the parts where you can hear the real Karl as well....on the first listen I didn't even hear the other voice. More going on in the background of this track, lots of little touches you don't hear the first time around too (sounds A LOT like Ancient Fat Farm Coat near the end....maybe Farm Coat is a part of the 20 minutes too..hmmm.) If this track is released as is...I would REALLY suggest turning up the "real voice track" up quite a bit in the mastering phase.

Besides, Daft Punk already proved that Robots suck ass at singing.....

rtzig · #3 10-22-2005, 07:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the mongoose

I would REALLY suggest turning up the "real voice track" up quite a bit in the mastering phase.

Mastering has nothing to do with changing levels or elements in a mix. Anything like this would require an artist to redo the mix before it was sent to be mastered. Mastering involves making sure that the disc flows well. All of the songs are level matched, songs are equalized a little to help them match, the whole disc is usually run through a little equalization and compression (or a shit ton of limiting, as is more the case these days). The master copy is then sent to the pressing plant.

Sorry, it's what I'm studying and it bothers me when people get it wrong.

viddy · #4 10-22-2005, 07:29 AM

I like the new track in that I can see how it might build up into a crazy wicked jam with a more 4/4 beat in the usual Underworld style, especially if this is a 25 minute track.

I do agree about the vocodor. TURN IT DOWN. I'd like to hear the dry vocal more, with the vocodor effect as more of a background embellishment.

King of Snake · #5 10-22-2005, 04:57 AM

First impression:
Hmmm, I must say the remix (if that's what it was) we heard earlier was waaay better than this. (that would be a first)
I have nothing against vocoders. UW have done some of the best vocoder tracks ever, but this just sounds uninspired at best.

Malt Refund · #6 10-22-2005, 06:22 AM

I think you guys would have loved it if you hadn't heard Bang the Poll. If you hadnt heard the original you all would be salivating over this I promise.

*_* · #7 10-22-2005, 06:36 AM

intrigued is all i'll say. definitely looking forward to the remixes of this one.

thanks stimpee, for posting a rip of the track.

stimpee · #8 10-22-2005, 07:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by *_*

thanks stimpee, for posting a rip of the track.

well i know everyone wanted to hear it asap. sorry the stream broke up so there are a few gaps but i cut them out and boosted the volume and mp3'd it. it says its a 96kbps but thats the lowest encode you can do without losing 44.1khz/stereo. Its actually a 32kbps/stereo real audio so I think you should all take that into consideration.

This will sound considerably richer and fuller, especially the bass. Much less tinnyness. As for my opinion on it, i like the groove and I think the bass will sound great on a pair of big speaker coming from a CD source. I already like the crazy chicken lyrics of JAL to tokyo/Bang the poll so thats all good. The vocoder, well, sure why not? Its not exactly Cher - Believe is it? (do you believe in life after love?)

Anyway, I've just got the whole essential selection in 192kbps from a UK source so i'll get that to you asap. Watch this space.

stimpee · #9 10-22-2005, 08:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stimpee

Anyway, I've just got the whole essential selection in 192kbps from a UK source so i'll get that to you asap. Watch this space.

and here it is as promised. This will be available for 7 days.

time to listen again, and re-appraise.

undarrenworld · #10 10-22-2005, 08:51 AM

Cheers Stimpee