DrScythe - announcing PROJECT 100! 100 songs within 10 years (91 songs and 9 1/2 years left)

Project 100

Video version:

Right after I’ve released the 7^th and 8^th song I realized that two of those eight songs weren’t part of the initial ‘more than 30 songs’. That means I am close to forty songs in the catalogue and as a matter of fact there are still many more ideas and parts lying around. This revelation spawned an idea: to record one hundred songs. I am the first to admit that I had no idea where the DrScythe project was headed. Just go on making songs and videos? Form a band at some point to play live but change the whole approach accordingly? Both options lacked something to me. I know that I am quite disciplined so just going on releasing songs wouldn’t be much of a problem no matter if there’s a lot of fans or not. But with no goal to achieve it felt a little random. And forming a band might not even work so my brain came up with a finish line:

100 original songs in 10 years!

Excluding:

-       Covers/Traditionals

-       Acoustic versions of own songs

-       the recently introduced Vaccines

-       Collaborations with more than ~20 sec guest part

Some may think that 100 songs over the course of 10 years aren’t that many others may be impressed by the sheer number. I myself simply instantly loved the idea of looking back one day and having released one hundred tracks.

Technically there’s a little discrepancy between the 100 songs and ten years when releasing monthly. It’s either the 123^rd song in November 2025 or the 100^th in December 2023. But one central element of project management is headroom and I think it’s fair to leave some space and just say: completing 100 songs within 10 years is big enough for one artist alone. If I can pull it off in seven so be it. I don’t want to force a certain date for the ‘big finale’ so if it turns out to be April 2024 it’ll be April 2024.

So let me explain the exclusions. The ‘Vaccines’ are obviously just for fun and do not count as a full song (especially as they’re limited to 1:59min). Although I am giving away the surprise now I want to say that I want to do acoustic versions of some of my songs and some traditional folk songs in the future on a random basis which are not even included in ‘monthly release’ (thus the ‘random’ tag) under the label ‘DrScythe raw’ or something like that. This would also include covers of copyrighted newer material if I’ll ever decide to do those.

As for collaborations it will depend on if they’re ever going to happen. I guess that the number of my future subscribers will be the central figure here for others to be interested in a collab. If there’ll be collabs I will allow the song to be a part of the 100 only if the guest part is around 20 seconds total. Anything way beyond that will get a different label. What I’d see as a possibility is to reissue a previously released song with a guest musician and simply do not count it again. But that’s to be figured out later…

Fun facts:

I’ll keep some statistics. All the instruments used are on their 1^st set of strings since I began the project (and no, I don’t need to change them, I don’t use regular nickel- or stainless steel roundwounds) but sooner or later that’ll change. I am on the 5^th pack of coffee. I use too many different picks to keep track of those accurately.

Aaaand let’s finish on a song; number 9 of 100!

DrScythe Recording Blog - Part IV: My mixing philosophy

I wanted to do a blog about EQing and then noticed that I didn’t explain my approach to mixing so far. And that would leave you with my tips for using EQs without knowing why I do use them in this way. So my mixing philosophy boils down to this:

Keep it as natural as possible but do whatever necessary to make it sound good to your ears.

This leads to several consequences.

1. My mixes will never sound as modern as most of the others.

This is pretty obvious. Modern mixes sound everything but natural and are pushed to the max in terms of usage of limiters especially the releases of mainstream artists or the big players of some genres. Of course this doesn’t apply to every major release…but the ‘plastic sound’ as I tend to call it is a standard at the moment. A standard I chose to avoid for matters of taste. I know that some of my songs would profit from an overly processed sound (Calling The X for example) but I prefer to keep learning how to achieve a fat but also warm sound that keeps the character of the originally recorded tracks. It seems that gluing the tracks together is a little bit more complicated this way but I will keep on learning and improving.

2. My mixes will never have a constant volume.

If there is a more quiet part in a song I won’t use the tricks of modern loudness to eliminate the overall dynamic of it. What you might have noticed is that I am very cautious when it comes to compression so far and that’s something I am working on. Controlling the dynamics on track level so that I don’t need much compression on the sum. I think it’s becoming better. Compression works a little counterintuitive so that I think most of the people will struggle a little with that when beginning to mix music.

3. Very few effects.

Well…I had a POD XT Pro, POD X3 Live, POD HD and a Vetta II Combo for years and used all the effects extremely rarely. I like effects when just fiddling around but not really in a finished song. A little chorus on an arpeggio here and there and the almighty duo of reverb and delay. But that’s it. Bit crusher, phaser, flanger, ring modulators…nice to play with but nothing more to me so far. We’ll see…I am not against them by default (although ‘natural’ seems to suggest no effects) but it’s basically just not my style.

4. I don’t care about competitive loudness.

Seriously. I just don’t care. I don’t think it’ll ever have to compete on airplay so I can just keep it at a normal level.

5. You wouldn’t normally…too bad.

You wouldn’t pan the drums from the drummer’s point of view – I do because it sounds and feels right to me. One of the most important things I took away from reading and watching interviews with well-known mixing engineers: they really don’t care about things like ‘normal’ or ‘regularly’. They are called if someone wants their style of mixing applied. Try out their tricks and tips, try out the standards but be honest with yourself and ‘mix it your way’ if that’s what you want the music to sound like.

6. But your mixes sound really cheap so far.

What a surprise I am still a beginner. I am not even able to achieve the things I want to but that’s part of the whole learning process. And instead of ruining other people’s hard work I am practicing with my own and will be able to easily remix everything later on.

Well this was a shorter one as I am busy getting two tracks out to you this month. And I am pretty sure that only few will like both songs. And owls won't like either of them.

Guaranteed displeasure if you're an owl

So long,

DrScythe

DrScythe Reviews II - D'Angelico EX-SS black'n'gold

Premise

If you haven’t read my review of the D’Angelico EX-SD you might wonder how I got this beautiful guitar. Well, first of all I don’t own it. It was lend to me by FACE - the European distributor for D’Angelico guitars – after my third place was sort of a runner-up in the endorser search over at Germany’s largest musicians community musiker-board.de. When applying for the game you had to name the guitar you’d wish to play in case you win and I instantly loved the EX-SS most. My favorite color was the transparent grey with black hardware. But the classic black’n’gold look of the instrument they send me is a classic for a reason: it looks great…

Links to the endorser search and the German review:

http://www.musiker-board.de/threads/dangelico-musiker-board-endorser-gesucht.625092/

http://www.musiker-board.de/threads/gitarre-dangelico-ex-sd-cherryburst.638069/

First impressions

Well I had to play Matrjoschka first. Giant box -> guitar box -> guitar case. And there she is. What a beauty. Just lying there elegantly. And there are other types of ‘existing’ in a guitar case for a guitar. I remember my Mockingbird hanging sloppily in her rectangular case. And even the Dean Soltero in its matching case didn’t look so well when being ‘parked’. Even the EX-SS’ little sister the EX-SD lacks this elegance…

I can’t resist no longer and get her out. The neck feels a little weird at first if you expect a pronounced C-shape. It’s a little flattened and actually feels really great. It appears to be slightly wider than usual necks but I didn’t measure (and to be honest: I care about how it feels – not its measurements).

Checking the tuning, strumming an E chord – fantastic! The typical boxy sound of a thinner semi-body but it comes with way more attack and sustain and in general louder than I expected. And way more acoustic touch to it too. The Semi-Hollows I own(ed) so far are/were way quieter and had less attack. This mystery is easily solved when looking at the construction details later. But for now the

Info and built quality

http://dangelicoguitars.com/guitars/standard-series/ex-ss/#DAEXSSBLK

Body - 1.75" Semi-Hollow

Body Shape - Single Cutaway

Top Material -Laminated Flame Maple

Back Material - Laminated Flame Maple

Size - 15"

Pickup - 2 Kent Armstrong Humbuckers

Binding - 5 Ply

Pickguard - Stairstep

Bridge - Tune-O-Matic

Tailpiece - D'Angelico Stairstep

Controls - 2 Volume / 2 Tone / 3 Way Toggle

Tuners - Grover Super Rotomatic

Nut - 1 11/16"

Neck Material - Hard Maple 2-Piece Walnut Center

Scale - 25"

Fretboard Material - Rosewood

Inlay - Mother of Pearl

Output Jack - Switchcraft USA

Case - Deluxe Hard Case

Truss Rod Cover - D'Angelico Stairstep

The overall design is very harmonious. Compared to what’s called ‘Art Deco’ elsewhere the elements (trussrodcover, pickguard, tailpiece, knobs, and tuners) used here are also designed in this style and adding up to the point that I must say: this guitar would look great in the Orient-Express (and I might add that I say that based on a personal experience). 

A very nice detail for lovers of bindings like me: the multiple layers are visible from all sides not just the front. Another point added to the ‘elegance’-list.

Let us now resolve the mystery of the louder sound: there’s not a full sustain block hidden beneath the top but a smaller one just to support the bridge which otherwise couldn’t be mounted with screws. So more sound, less feedback resistance? Nope, it’s just as resistant as my Ibanez AS-53. Both not quite on par with solid body guitars but there are several examples for using hollow bodies (Killing Joke anyone?).

The built quality is excellent. Frets, nut – overall setup is well done. The only thing I would mildly criticize is the lack of strap locks. If you spend 1,5k on a guitar you want it secured don’t you? I install those very cheap (guitar) life savers on all my guitars and they never let me down so far. Back to the good things: the included case. Well made, basic cable, key and tool included. Nice.

Handling

As I already mentioned the neck profile let’s begin there. The flat C should suit anyone who’s not after a pronounced V or an Ibanez-style Wizard neck. Well rounded edges keep it very comfortable even for my short fingers. The whole instrument lies good on the lap and also hangs well balanced on the strap. I guess the larger body works against the pull of the headstock in both positions. The knobs and the toggle feel very good. Just the right amount of resistance. As usual with this type of setup on a larger guitar the knobs for the bridge are slightly more far away than what I would call comfortable and on the way to the bridge volume you’re running into the pickguard. Not too much of a problem for me but there are people who’re using the controls constantly and those might want to check this out before buying if they want to keep the pickguard on there.

Author’s note: I use 13-56 strings for standard tuning so the 10-46 which are used here feel like rubber to me. But as this is not an issue caused by the instrument itself I didn’t want to describe it as a part of the handling

Sound

I already stated that it sounds way more acoustic and louder than my Ibanez AS-53 or other Semi-Hollows I played and owned. The notes quickly ‘bloom’ to their fullest and then split up into overtones and a slowly decreasing base note. The Kent Armstrong pickups translate this very well balanced sound perfectly. Just like the EX-SD the bridge pickup seems a little too tame but with modern amplifiers that won’t be a problem in terms of achievable gain and could even help with keeping details like the picking attack when using high gain. Although the pickups suit the guitar very well I’d love to hear the EX-SS with some Bareknuckle Mississippi Queens or other Humbucker-sized P90s.

I wanted to use the guitar in a song right away and during the recording it just got the name ‘Lucy’. It wasn’t a conscious decision it just came to my mind and the damage was done…

Here’s the song:

Conclusion

D’Angelico says that the EX-SS shines ‘when kept clean or boosted with overdrive and is ‘ideal for R&B, jazz, rock and all the nameless places in between’. That’s right. And you can also use high gain for fat leads or metal stuff. It sounds great. Although you couldn’t tell by the looks it’s an incredibly flexible guitar if the amplification of your choice is flexible enough. If you like this guitar you will most probably be able to use it in any context especially since ‘music’ isn’t about using the correct gear but about the musician being inspired and implementing his ideas. And to me ‘Lucy’ does this perfectly. I’m going to miss her…