Ok so is it 13/8 or not???

[lenron]

Ok, so I am *supposed* to be a musician who has played in progressive bands, and I am *supposed* to be familiar with everything from playing in odd time to playing in no time to playing multiple times on top of each other. Technically, yeah I am supposed to be that.

Well, apparently I've tons to learn (duh) and I cannot figure out the main progression/riff in "Frame By Frame" by King Crimson. The secondary part, the 7/8 part, is understandable, even with the time shifting of the 2nd guitar to create an echo effect. But its the main part, the intro part, that I can't quite grasp yet.

Aside from Fripp's 16th note flurry of a riff, there is a matter of not being certain what signature the whole darn thing is in. I've been told 13/8, but I can't find it as easily as I thought I could. Somehow I either A.) listen inaccurately and get distracted by the whole beautiful mess or B.) make an assumption, musically, of what is happening and then realize it was a wrong assumption.

Could someone shed some light on what's going on in there, or at least an opinion? Its been bugging me this week. Visual aids would be great. hehe.

What-Kind-Of-Lame-Prog-Musician-Am-I Nino (lenron)

[roger]

I wish I could help. I love odd time. but somehow, sadly, KC is one of those bands that I missed along the line. they're something that I need to dig into, and fill that gap. which album is "Frame" on?

[Rick and Roll]

is the name of the album. It's possibly my all-time favorite record.

However, I know little about time signatures. Sounds like 3/4 to me!

Geddy Lee played that tune as a guest DJ one. It must be cool, right!

[kevishev]

Originally posted by lenron

I've been told 13/8, but I can't find it as easily as I thought I could.

Not being able to read music myself and being in construction, I look at 13/8 as being 1 5/8".

What-Kind-Of-Lame-Prog-Musician-Am-I Nino (lenron)

Practice young man! Practice!

Does the Phoenix not rise from it's own ashes?

My name is Kevin, and I approved this posting.

ps: Lenron, I'm sorry that I was unable to be of any help to you whatsoever. But like others in these forums, sometimes I just can't help myself.

[lenron]

Yes I must agree Discipline is one of my all-time fave albums too. A truly revolutionary record for 1981, no question.

The disc is riddled in odd time, no time, and geniusly orchestrated multiple times layering on top of each other. If you know little, nay, nothing about music and music theory then I suppose the album "sounds really cool", but doesn't stir you in the same way an interested musician might get stirred.

In bands I have been in, particularly my last band, odd times were smiled upon greatly. Our inside "joke" if you would, was "Play it in 7!!". As in, play it in 7/8. We would occasionally incorporate a cover tune into our setlist, and sometimes play it 7/8 or 9/8 or something even though the song, like most rock songs, was in straight time (4/4).

I could yammer on and on about the philosophies of playing in odd time and why it can be so fun to do, but I am here to beg and plead for help understanding "Frame By Frame"...so I'll be quiet now and see if a musician pops up with some insight.

Thanks...!

[Bob Lentil]

I'm pretty sure it's in 4/4 at the beginning (listen to the drums). I found a tab that claims Fripp is laying down a sextuplet on each beat. It sounds plausible, but I'm not going to vouch for its accuracy, because I can't play it. You can check it out here. Scroll down to the part submitted by Reginald Hunt.

[Roger -Dot- Lee(Admin)]

I've always been fairly good at ferreting out exactly what odd time signatures happen to be playing (ObTrivia: did you know that the clock on "It's A Small World" at Disneyland plays a multimeter 22/8-17/8?).

I'll give it a listen and see what I can figure out.

Roger -Dot- Lee, oddest time signature played: 23/8

[Roger -Dot- Lee(Admin)]

Originally posted by lenron
Well, apparently I've tons to learn (duh) and I cannot figure out the main progression/riff in "Frame By Frame" by King Crimson. The secondary part, the 7/8 part, is understandable, even with the time shifting of the 2nd guitar to create an echo effect. But its the main part, the intro part, that I can't quite grasp yet.

And the verdict is:

7/8 with 8th note anticipations in the second guitar.

Don't let the second entry (an 8th note early) confuse you. It's simply tied over the bar. If you count out 7 beats continuously, you'll find you end right smack on 1 when it goes to 4/4 time. I think you're confusing the entry of the second guitar as the first guitar shifting gears.

HTH!

Roger -Dot- Lee, Leonard Bernstein in a different lifetime.

[Yesspaz]

Originally posted by Bob Lentil
I'm pretty sure it's in 4/4 at the beginning (listen to the drums).

Don't let Bill Bruford fool you. He has a penchant for playing in a different time signature than the rest of the band. On "Long Distance Runaround" by Yes, the band is in 4/4 while Bill is in 5/4 (and it takes extraordinary musicians to play on a different rhythm than the drummer does - no matter what band).

[lenron]

Some fine information. My additions...

I did some research and found that someone said that during the 7/8 part, the guitars are in tandem (written as 14/8 by this author) and he claims that the 2nd guitar shifts to a 13/8 riff, which of course creates an offset that grows and then comes back to meet the original riff in tandem again at the appropriate time - in this case after 7 measures of 14/8. Is this another way of saying what you said Roger? Agree? Disagree?

And thanks for the unintentional compliment, Yesspaz. hehe. What I mean is, a band I was in up til earlier this year did that time signature overlap thing. One example was a song we did with an interlude that broke down like this:

Bass: riff for 6 beats, riff for 8 beats et al
Drums: 7/8 et al
Keyboard: Ascending chords over minor scale every 4 beats et al

It all matched up every 28 beats, which we'd sometimes accent. That is to say, every 28 beats we'd all begin our progression in tandem on the 1. And after 224 beats (8 repetitions) we'd move back into 6/8, 4/4, 6/8, 4/4 that was the rest of the song. Man I love doing that.

[Roger -Dot- Lee(Admin)]

Originally posted by lenron
Some fine information. My additions...

I did some research and found that someone said that during the 7/8 part, the guitars are in tandem (written as 14/8 by this author) and he claims that the 2nd guitar shifts to a 13/8 riff, which of course creates an offset that grows and then comes back to meet the original riff in tandem again at the appropriate time - in this case after 7 measures of 14/8. Is this another way of saying what you said Roger? Agree? Disagree?

Agreed. What he said was pretty much what I said from the perspective of looking at the sheet music, whereas I'm going strictly by the sound.

And thanks for the unintentional compliment, Yesspaz. hehe. What I mean is, a band I was in up til earlier this year did that time signature overlap thing. One example was a song we did with an interlude that broke down like this:
[snip: massive multi-meter]

Wow. It takes a LOT of concentration to be able to pull that off.

My first exposure to multi-meter was in my high school marching band. We did a 6/8-4/4 multimeter. Doesn't sound like much? YOU try doing that on a football field!

Man I love doing that.

Say on. There's a certain sense of accomplishment when you can pull something like that off and make it sound good...

Roger -Dot- Lee

[kirk]

[QUOTE
Say on. There's a certain sense of accomplishment when you can pull something like that off and make it sound good...[/quote]

it's even more amazing that adrian pulls it off
from memory, unable to read music!
in an interview, adrian said he asked FZ if
he should learn to read, and zappa replied
"absolutely not, it'll ruin your instincts".

hey dot- when are we going to hear something by you?
if you need some guidance w/ the sequencing thing,
give a yell.

[Yesspaz]

I don't think a similar discussion is going on over at the Blink 182 boards.

[lenron]

Certainly Belew does infinitely more complicated stuff than I could ever do, but I too am lacking in my ability to read music and have to be sure to memorize whats coming up next in a song, or at least hope that the music itself will lend me hints as to how it is progressing, by ear, and hope I can keep up. A lot of "complicated" songs I have been a part of creating with other musicians are usually pre-determined patterns with slight variances. Once you know the pattern inately, you then can modify it depending on what the song calls for. At times, songs that seem wildly complicated are 4 or 5 main patterns with variances in each, creating the illusion of a "monster" arrangement of 15 to 20 sections.

I have noticed, however, that a lot of songs I DIDN'T write have the same formula: Variances on a pattern(s). And when done properly, it makes for a very dynamic song. (I am not speaking of a 12-bar blues pattern here...I mean patterns like the song in question "Frame By Frame" which, although its a complicated and hard-to-play pattern, is nonetheless repetitious in the end.) When done poorly, it begins to grate and can sound seriously lame. (enter 12-bar blues again)

Few musicians can make genius arrangements of long, complicated songs truly unique, never repeating, and highly rhapsodic without having to rely on pattern variances. Those who can do this, of course, tend to be able to read and write notation as easily as reading language. One insane example in the jazz world is Michel Camilo, whose over-the-top jazz instrumental arrangements would send even the most seasoned musicians crying for mommy. Thats why his trio is himself, Anthony Jackson, and Horacio "El Negro" Hernandez....I mean, who else?

My wife can sight read, but I've never gotten around to having her help me learn. Oh sure, I can read a guitar or bass tab with ease, but my notation reading easily less than 5% of what it should/could be with the right effort. Which I don't make, sadly. Its the biggest, gaping hole in my music theory knowledge at this point. I used to even give guitar and bass lessons once....had to skirt the subject of notation on many occasion. The embarrassment!!

[lenron]

hehe. Don't get me started on all the kids I had to teach Blink 182 songs to when I taught guitar and bass. Good lord!

You put on KC for these kids and you might as well be playing FM static, because they literally hear NOTHING. I feel, sometimes, like the oldest 28 year old I know.

[Roger -Dot- Lee(Admin)]

Originally posted by kirk
hey dot- when are we going to hear something by you?
if you need some guidance w/ the sequencing thing,
give a yell. [/b]

Consider the yell given. I may be able to make computers do just about anything, but I'll be buggered if any kind of sound engineering doesn't leave me stumped.

Spent too much of my theater days doing lights, I suppose.

In any event, it seems that just about any time I try to improve a sound file, it just makes matters worse, and god help us all if I try to record my own voice to anything more complex than an answering machine. I tend to sound half way between a pig with it's tail stuck in the door of a 1997 Ford F-150 and the alarm sound that an elevator makes when the door's been left open too long. I found an application for the Mac that I've had some success with, but it's got a lot of toys that COULD make things sound better, but yet I manage to make things sound worse. Ah well.

Anyway, if I could get some guidance from a pro, that would, as they say, rock. I might even get a cool ID up on the station.

Roger -Dot- Lee, Ahh, That's Nice.

PS: Here come the 'toopid questions: what is sequencing?

[Rick and Roll]

Originally posted by Roger Lee
In any event, it seems that just about any time I try to improve a sound file, it just makes matters worse

Does this mean the excellent job you did on mine is really bogus?

[Roger -Dot- Lee(Admin)]

Originally posted by Rick and Roll
Does this mean the excellent job you did on mine is really bogus?

Actually, it actually means it's really lucky. I had to start from scratch three times because this one thing I thought was cool would actually introduce a hiss or make your Ps pop or blast my meter past the red into the ultra-violet or make the neighbors stick their heads out their doors and ask "What the HELL was THAT?!?!?"

Seriously, I'd REALLY like to be able to do a better job than what I did on those clips. I know it can be done, and I know I have the equipment to do it. I just haven't got the first inkling as to how to go about it.

Roger -Dot- Lee, Larnin' sumpthin' new agin....

[lenron]

Hey Rog....I am a self-proclaimed sound engineer/producing HOBBYIST. One of my passions, regardless of whether or not I am a certified "pro". Whats the scoop on your audio situation? If you explain it from the beginning, since I am obviously catching this exchange mid gallop, maybe I can help? Who knows. I also know my Macs and Mac audio apps fairly well...so I am intrigued to see if I can help your problem(s). Try me!

[Roger -Dot- Lee(Admin)]

Originally posted by lenron
Hey Rog....I am a self-proclaimed sound engineer/producing HOBBYIST. One of my passions, regardless of whether or not I am a certified "pro". Whats the scoop on your audio situation? If you explain it from the beginning, since I am obviously catching this exchange mid gallop, maybe I can help? Who knows. I also know my Macs and Mac audio apps fairly well...so I am intrigued to see if I can help your problem(s). Try me!

OK. Here's Dr. Dot's Audio Issues, from the word go:

I have an eMac with 768 MB Memory and a 1 GHZ cpu. Plenty of elbow room. I have a dirt cheap microphone that I picked up from Worst Buy about 6 months or so ago. It's a USB mike since the external audio in port on my Mac hasn't worked from day one. I suppose I should have gotten it fixed a long time ago, but it was never important enough to warrant the loss of my computer for [X] days.

Anyway, I have the internal built in audio port, which works fine for sending Mom and Dad their yearly audio birthday cards from the Atlanta Branch of the Lee family, but for The Moon, it Just Won't Do. I got Garage Band to do some recording work, but have yet to have the time to really master it (Note: once I get the time (HA!), I'm going to hook the kids' keyboard to the Midi port and start composing some music).

Anyway. The biggest problem with the mic and audio setup that I have is level control. One pixel to the left and you can't hear anything, one pixel to the right and it's so overloaded that the spectrum analyzer pegs, looks at me strangely, and promptly goes to file a formal complaint with the shop steward. There seems to be no in-between. Once I get that working, I should be in a much better position to do something. Anything.

When I finally DO get the levels worked out to where they're workable, I have this background hiss that I've been trying to get rid of, but thus far have been unsuccessful. What do I have to do to get rid of this?

I guess my first question should be: does anyone have a good pointer to a web site called "Audio Engineering for Dummies" or some such? I've got access to filters and plug-ins galore but have no idea what any of them do.

When I said the work I did on Rick's sound files was luck, I wasn't joking. The only difference is that his sound files were a much better starting point than anything I've been able to create to date.

Having said all that, what do YOU need to know about what I know or what I have to help me out?

Roger -Dot- Lee, thankful for all the help.