next »

[fingersoup]

Novus has been at it again, with some interesting ideas regarding Tracking.  While I don't necessarily agree with them all, I think he brings up a point worth discussion - With MP3 taking over as people's main music distribution format, do we still need, or have a Tracking scene?


As a tracker, I find that this is a very hard thing to discuss, especially in such a public forum, for fear of alienating users.  The fact is, that our native file formats are no longer as widely known as their rendered cousins.  Many people involved in our tracking scene tend to get involved in the "music scene" a lot more.  Likewise, those hardcore bunch of trackers that kick it oldskool in the demoscene tend to stick to their groups and demo-specific sites.  More and more, the Tracking side of things seems to get dispersed in the mix.  Some people argue that the tracking scene is dead.

Yet, on the other hand, I take a look at our web statistics for United Trackers - with over 4500 unique visitors to the site monthly.  Likewise with sites like modulez.org releasing tracked content on a regular basis, as well as the popularity of software like MadTracker and Skale, not to mention all the people releasing brand new trackers, Like MilkyTracker, and BeroTracker with an IT interface...  Even the open-source people are getting on with Wavelet Tracker, Modplug and Psycle.  There surely must be some kind of a demand for tracking resources...  This is an obvious sign that the scene has at least a few more good years left.


So if there is such a demand, Why am I bothering to write this article?  Simple...  Even though there's a lot of demand, it's still a lot less than what we had even just 3 years ago...  More and more people release their songs as MP3, or OGG Vorbis.  What is clearly something that came out of a tracker, is something that is now dumped to a series of WAV files, post-produced, then reassembled into an MP3 to save space...  Those rendered WAV files take up lots of space!!!

But as Novus has pointed out on his site, most people don't bother to learn the finer points of tracking... 

I'm not saying you NEED to use track-doubling and offset tricks in order to do reverb, or echo.  I'm saying the possibility is out there, and many times offers you the result you were looking for without having to reach outside your tracker.  What I am also saying, is that there may be a better way of releasing your music to the public, while still supporting the scene that offers you the software.

Honestly, how many people here have listened to Nectarine Radio and tried to look up an old .MOD, .S3M, .XM or .IT file to see how it was done?  This is a MAJOR part of the scene we are losing...  When was the last time you could learn from someone else by looking at the source?

One of the things we are losing with MP3, is a sense of community.  Sure your music might be tracked, but if you've worked really hard on it, nobody can tell the difference, if it's MP3.  While this can be good in some ways (You can really break down the barrier of being called an "amateur"), you can also alienate those in the scene who helped you learn, and get to that point.  I don't know anyone who exists in the tracking scene who has done EVERYTHING by themselves.  I say, why not pay a little respect to your roots...  It's easy.  Make your source available.  Post your XM, even alongside your post-produced MP3, to show the world that "Tracking" isn't synonymous with Antiquated, Amateur, or Unnatural. 

Who cares if it doesn't sound quite the same as your post-produced masterpeice?  Post-production should be an act of subtlety, anyways.  It's essentially Mixing with a few effects added.  There's nothing worse than listening to some overproduced Boy Band that has all the talent of a bag of nails, and tries to cover it up with cheezy digital pitch-shifting a la Cher...  It's no different in the tracking world either.  And yes, this is coming from someone who is an avid user and supporter of VST technology in tracking.  If you're song is good, it will still stand up MUSICALLY, if not technologically.  I'm a firm supporter, that if you write a great Rock song, it should still sound just as good musically on an accoustic guitar, as it does on screaming distorted guitars, on an album produced by Butch Vig...  Giving that source out, is like making an accoustic performance for us trackers.  And everybody likes a band that is willing to give that accoustic performance to their fans.  It's more personal.  It's those personal touches that give an artist their followers.  It's what will bring NEW tracking artists to our scene in order to keep YOUR scene's tools alive and kicking.

Let's face it, with all these new Modular Trackers, you can make songs that have "Professional Quality" sound...  What most people forget, is that there are quite a few talented Traditional trackers, who made great sounding stuff for their time, and with all the advances in hardware, could EASILY be converted into a Professional sounding song, with just a few sample/instrument updates, and the parameter changes that come with them, or perhaps a little post production...  However, you still listen to it, BECAUSE IT'S A GOOD SONG.  Have faith in your own work.  Don't hide it behind an MP3 and some post production.  Sharing sources has fallen by the wayside, and I for one can't see one good reason why.


Likewise, I see lots of communities built around all these individual modern trackers...  Psycle has Psycledelics.  MadTracker has MadTracker.org.  People are sticking to their own trackers these days.  Which is really interesting, now that developers are trying to add "Legacy Tracker formats" to their software...  Gone are the XM vs IT wars of yesterday.  I'm not saying we should bring the flamewars back (I hope we don't), however, I think that healthy discussion on the benefits of one tracker vice another, are perfectly normal, and encouraged. 

I don't mind people saying that Madtracker works better with samples than Psycle does...  I don't mind people saying that Psycle's Machine/VST interface is more intuitive than MadTracker's...  What I mind, is the lack of discussion that occurs in general, between users of different software.  I want people to learn about VST, even if they decide they don't want any part of it.  I want people to learn all the old tricks, and use them to create something new and exciting.  I want people to accept that there are new ways, and old ways.  Both have their merits and their shortcomings.

I'm also not saying that these individual program-specific communities shouldn't exist... I am an active member over at Psycledelics myself.  However, I don't see many of the Psycle crew branching themselves out to other tracking sites.  I'm sure that's partially because Psycle was looked down upon as a "Buzz clone" for its first couple years, but also, because nobody really discussed the differences between Psycle and Buzz away from the Psycle and Buzz-specific forums...  Nobody said, "Hey, Psycle's actually pretty close to IT/FastTracker, except for the machine view"...  At least, nobody releasing music said it loud enough, or publicly enough for people to listen...  Only the hobbyist such as myself who couldn't finish a song to save his life saw this, up until recently.  And even then, most Psycle releases are only seen in the Psycle community, as opposed to the Tracking Scene at large.


Then there's a new problem - For the scene to survive, The scene needs to grow, and replace those that leave.  Does the scene want to grow?  Everywhere I look, it's "Oldskool Compo" this, and "IT/XM/S3M/MOD Only" that, and "No VST/VSTi" again...  These kinds of rules and attitudes may be shooting our scene in the foot. 

For so long, people have been asking for "FastTracker 3" and "Impulse Tracker 3"...  They all wanted VST support.  They all wanted more compatibility, better sound resolution, more effects, better enveloping...  Well, They're here NOW.  They might not be called Impulse Tracker 3, or FastTracker 3, but instead they're called Psycle, MadTracker, Skale, MilkyTracker, BeroTracker, and Modplug Tracker.  Do you honestly think that if Jeffery Lim wrote Impulse Tracker 3, he'd have left it with the same exact featureset as Impulse Tracker 2.15?  Do you think that Mouse support would still be lacking?  Of course not... 

Just as Envelopes and New Note Actions changed the tracking world, these Newer windows-based trackers are changing the tracking world in all the ways the tracking community asked for...  Now people have "GO Oldskool" on their brains...  Yet they STILL release their music in MP3.  I say, instead of supporting MP3, that you should support .PSY!  Support .MT2! Support SKM!  Support BRT!  Support these in ADDITION to XM, IT, S3M, and MOD...  Support them freely, and share them amongst trackers of ALL software, not just Your software.  Urge your developers to release file format specs.  Urge them to create Import functions for these other new formats.  Urge developers to talk to one another, to create a single, open format that all trackers can work with.   Ask for a self-describing tracker format.  Convergence is the one thing trackers NEED, but don't have...  the only thing close to convergance right now, is the ability to import legacy formats. 

I should mention, that it would be nice to see a new standard format that can be played in Anything, while still retaining all the note-by-note, Sample-by-sample information.  Unfortunately, this is not feasible for the VST/Machine-based world.  So we MUST release our source, and allow for others to aquire the plugins they want.  Creating an alternate means of playback via a "dummy Plugin" or Default plugin, is essential.  The sound won't be perfect...  but that's not the point.  The point is, that anyone can see that your work is a tracked work.  Trackers can have a strong support network.  Trackers can Teach others, regardless of whether they sit and chat in an IRC channel, or just post a few songs.


So Now what?  Are we going to support our scene?  Or are we going to let it antiquate itself into a cesspool of nostalgia?  I for one see a future in the tracking scene, provided people keep the helpful spirit alive, and start releasing source files again...  Further, the users need to support each other in TRACKER comunities.  And, if developers can support each other (and I'm sure a few already do), by sharing file format info and building conversion utilities into their software for all the new formats, the tracking scene will thrive again.

[negative1]

hello, I'm very new to this whole thing. But, I've used IT and ScreamTracker as far back as 1995. I'm going to ask a few basic questions, so please forgive me if I seem a little naive. What is the relationship between <tracking scene> and <mp3 format>? I don't see how these two elements have an effect on each other. What is the relationship between <native file formats> and <rendered cousins>? What is the difference between <demoscene> and <music scene>? How could the tracker scene be going dead when all these new tracker programs are coming out with all these new, cool options and better sound quality? And finally, why is it that I could compose a really, really, complex peice of music with IT, but it would never have the quality of sound that let's say an Aphex Twin, Autechre, or a Future Sound of London track would have?

[fingersoup]

What is the relationship between <tracking scene> and <mp3 format>? I don't see how these two elements have an effect on each other. What is the relationship between <native file formats> and <rendered cousins>?

Tracked formats have several advantages over MP3 - Tracked formats will provide the full fidelity of the song, where MP3 wil make sacrifices.  You can open a tracked file and learn from it.  Often, Tracked files are smaller than MP3, (unless you're using large instruments, which can be hard to find)

What is the difference between <demoscene> and <music scene>? How could the tracker scene be going dead when all these new tracker programs are coming out with all these new, cool options and better sound quality?

Demoscene refers to the larger part which encompasses the tracking scene.  Tracking can also be seen as an exclusive scene in it's heyday, because there were quite a few people who tracked and had no association with demoscene groups - all they did was track...  Demoscene implies that there is video and code as part of the process, which in terms of only tracking - doesn't apply.  And what this article adresses, it the fact that trackers are no longer as united as they used to be...  Everyone goes to their own site, like Madtracker.org, or Psycledelics...  Nobody discusses each other's trackers anymore.  It's the large community that is disappearing, nt necessarily the smaller groups who devote themselves to one program.  For instance, There may be a Madtracker scene, or a Psycle scene that is thriving, but the tracking scene has a low number of people who participate in ways that help others.

And finally, why is it that I could compose a really, really, complex peice of music with IT, but it would never have the quality of sound that let's say an Aphex Twin, Autechre, or a Future Sound of London track would have?

Sound drivers, sample quality and mixing options  are all fairly primitive in early/traditional trackers...  you CAN produce studio quality stuff, but then again you need to really be aware of your mixing, and slave over finnicky effects values for every note you play.  Or you could split each track/instrument up and render to WAV, then use another program to mix.  The only thing stopping you these days is your skill and knowledge of music software...

[Airway]

Hello all of you.

I'm a new member at UT, but not a newbie to the whole tracking thing. I think this is indeed a very interesting topic. It's a weird thing to know that back in the days, when all I had was a floppy disk drive (no usb sticks, no internet, no cd-rom even!), I had a huge collection of .xm modules. Most of them were hiphop beats or jungle tunes. I had to play it all back on a self-built LPT DAC, so that would make 8 bit mono sound. And I loved it! Good thing was that I could easily export my whole file to WAV and thereby play it back over the non-soundblaster compatible card in windows 3.1... And do some dynamic processing.

So what has happened? We've got the internet, cdroms, usb, and lots of other ways to share our modules. But I hardly receive anything from anyone! The only things I get to hear are indeed MP3's. Maybe it's just BEACAUSE of the increased ease of transferring data. Nowadays you can send a huge wave file to wherever in the world. So: no need for xm's, it's of s3m's.

And I think that's a pity too. But then again, as a madtracker user, I realise that my modules containing vst's actually don't play on older versions of madtracker, or on machines that don't have the same plugins that I have. Indeed: some sort of standard would be great, think MIDI...

And the last issue would be the purpose of the music. I don't NEED to distribute modules anymore, since the most of the stuff I make will be used in hiphop songs or will be exported to use in Sonar. I record everything at home. And if I want to record elsewhere, I'm stuck to bringing in a wave file for compatibilities sake. Professional studio's still lack trackers

So, I think it's not that the Tracker Scene will die. It's just a problem sharing your files in native formats!

[sector7seven]

I just wanted to comment on the fact that the tracking isnt dead for me too, even though i didnt make a single song in a tracker the last 4 years. Nowadays i use it as a compliment, a drum mashine, a sequenser, a software synth. Some of my songs are basically 90% tracked though. I create the loops i desire in my tracker software and render elements as .wav-files and put it all together in in Reason or Cubase for example. It still get the warm fuzzy feeling creating a song this way that i get making it all in the tracker softare. I always felt kind of limited using trackers and i stopped using them at all a few years back, mostly becuz i simply couldn't get Fasttracker 2 to run on my PC. Then i rediscovered tracking and "Modplug-Tracker" I didnt like the program at all.. Too complex, It looked ugly and the user interface too damn annoying. Well ...without even giving it a try i gave up. Then i found Skale. Practically looks and feels same like fasttracker and runs quite well despite it's still beta and havn't been updated in years. I don't like using effects and other stuff in my trackers.. I want it plain and simple.. No delay, reverb, anything... but i just LOVE the way you can make what you want with cergical precission using only a tracker.

So .. for that part that the old tunes and formats died ... of course... it's evolution.. my last completely finishedFasttracker songs tended to be more than 40-60 Mb in size. Using samples 1 for left, 1 for right. Rendering a wav file and importing it again to the tracker to save channels. Nevertheless i totally agree you can make awesome songs using only a tracker and a limited amount of MB, but that's a matter of taste rather than anything else. If you want to make that kind of song go ahead. But if you aim to make a song sounding like the music that's popular now tracking can't offer much if you want to do it all the oldschool way.

So... to the part where tracking still is unbeatable ---> Making loops...
* Where can you find a more advanced drum mashine? you can load the tracker with TONS of drumsamples and create awesome loops and control every single beat to a pinpoint precission?
* Where can you find a software synth/sampler capable of what a tracker can do? Controlling the envelopes and even editing the samples and loops within the sampler itself?
* Where can you find a sequenzer better at making awesome grooves using pitch, cutoff, Volume etc and be able to control it all in detail??

The evolution of tracking in my opinion is heading the wrong way. Don't implement VST effects in the tracker, Dont implement anything!!! Go the other way around... Implement the tracker in the softare of today. Make the tracker a VST instrument or a plugin and you ont be needing anything else ever again!!! Use your handy Tracker in every single track in your music composition. What else do you need really? Then just add the effects you want and master it all at once.

...and for the tracker format ... make an online library... not for songs .. but for shorter loops!!! all tracked a ready to be implemented or rendered for use in any music software ... scalable BPM loops without loosing quality. Change the instruments in the loop to whatever you desire. Change the notes, pitch and tones. Edit it and temper with it until it sounds exactly like you want ...

THAT'S THE FUTURE OF TRACKING in my opinion...

I make music professionally in my work and even in my spare time under the artist name "sector7seven". If you come across the song "don't follow the stream" listen to it .. That song is 100% tracked in FastTracker 2 (i still have the XM files if somone doubt it). and labels have been offering to sign it, so there's no way someone can claim tracking can't sound professional enough. In my work i make background music for videos etc from time to time, and Tracking is defenetly a complement to my workflow. i HATE buying or using sample CD's. I don't want to use a drumloop that probably many other producers have used in their work and orst of all... if somone recognize it.. I like to make it all from scratch and that's where the tracker comes in....  Once again -- > Imigine that HUGE online library of 100% editable loops all made in tracking ... That's the future!!!

[Blaster]

...and for the tracker format ... make an online library... not for songs .. but for shorter loops!!! all tracked a ready to be implemented or rendered for use in any music software ... scalable BPM loops without loosing quality. Change the instruments in the loop to whatever you desire. Change the notes, pitch and tones. Edit it and temper with it until it sounds exactly like you want ...

THAT'S THE FUTURE OF TRACKING in my opinion...

Once again -- > Imigine that HUGE online library of 100% editable loops all made in tracking ... That's the future!!!

That's a rather interesting idea you got there.

[fingersoup]

Some things that may interest you:

ReViSiT
Skale (You already seem to know about this one)


This Idea is a valid arguement for supporting the PROCESS of Tracking, and may help improve the Music scene....  But this idea does not necessarily promote the Tracking scene...  Once again, you will have all the individual sites for ReViSiT, Skale, and other VSTi trackers' users to visit, And you will also have major sites for Host programs...  But in saving the process, one could argue that they are killing the tracking scene by moving the tracker into programs that have nothing to do with tracking.  Placing tracking in an even more diluted marketplace than what it already is in, may in turn cause it's death, because most people who use sequencers and the like don't associate music with grids....

On the other hand, bringing VST to the Tracker is also evolution...  I Track Rock music.  As opposed to having a 30+MB distorted guitar Instrument (in the XI sense) that has doesn't sound quite realistic, I can pass my smaller clean guitar instrument through a distortion VST, and get a much more realistic sound... 

Yes it's a matter of preference to use VST/VSTi in trackers, but I find it easier than having to load 5 or 10 different tracker VSTi's up into my sequencer, and apply different effects to different trackers.

Not trying to be a pessimist here, but I just want to show the other side of the coin....  To be honest, I think Skale has the idea almost right, by offering both a standalone version and a VST version.  What would even be better, would be a tracker that supports ReWire (MadTracker already does) or JACK (The Linux answer to ReWire).  This, I believe is a more amicable solution...  Co-existance and allowing multiple forms of interactivity, as opposed to always forcing your tracker to be the slave.  Pinpoint accuracy IS a benefit of trackers.  Can't we use that accuracy to CONTROL other software/technologies instead of being a slave to it?

I also think Windows needs a free "JACK-Like" interface - one that isn't bound by restrictive license agreements.  ReWire is a relatively closed technology, because of its lack of support for open-source projects.  But I SOOOO want that funcionality in Psycle....

[goldbaker]

This still seems to be an active thread, so I thought I would reply.  I actually only just discovered trackers a few months ago and really like Psycle.  As far as the tracking scene goes, I certainly hope it doesn't decline, and VST functionality is a big part of keeping it going.  For years, I had been using either notation editors or hosts with piano roll editors for my classical and techno-style music (I also record some audio -- guitar and blues, etc.)  When I found Psycle, I realized that it was the perfect notation tool for writing for the computer.  Combined with the flexibility to use samples, VSTis, etc., it has been a lot of fun.  And free to boot.

I would also like to see more tracking files in their original form, as well as listening to Mp3s.  The problem there is finding free or cheap web hosting that will give you enough space (without irritating pop-ups, etc.) to load up those files.

Anyway, just to let everyone know that new trackers are still being created.

[Blaster]

There's a lot of quality free web hosts.. umm if you make quality music that is

Try the internet archive for instance.

I found myself a cheap Dutch host with plenty of space, plenty of bandwith and a domain.. it's only 2 euro's a month.. a year of hosting sets me back less than a night on the town

[Merle Zimmermann]

Aaah, I guess I forgot to list this article as one of the main inspirations for me to try my hand at trying to use a tracker again, after I gave up the last time ''`

Um, thanks for writing your essay, fingersoup.  It was part of what encouraged my recent attack of bravery.

[Pinwizkid]

For me, Tracking is not about the file format, or memory space saving.  Rather, it is about the method of music creation.  Trackers let me be more creative than a grand staff ever will.  VST technology let's me expand that creativity.  I write music using trackers as a hobby (for right now at least), and all of my friends that have seen a tracker are quite fascinated by it.  The feeling of having no limits with a technological tracker like Renoise is where trackers should be heading, because I think trackers simply need more creative artists to use them - artists that will be fascinated and inspired by their simplicity and capability, like I was when I first started using Adlib Tracker 2.  I have said this before and I will say it again, the tracker is the most ingenius music software out there, but no one knows that they are out there - not even college music technology professors!

                    Brendan