Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Jimi Hendrix was a systems engineer

spectrum.ieee.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 264 posts

Re: Jimi Hendrix was a systems engineer

#241

Post by dwd »

jawilson2 wrote: post #237
dwd wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Similar to the Theremin is the ondes Martenot. Jonny Greenwood (Radiohead) describes it as a "very accurate Theremin". You can hear it particularly on "Where I End and You Begin" from Hail to the Thief. Ed O'Brien compliments its sound using an EBow (back before he had the sustainer) in that song. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ondes_Martenot

Yes! I always think first of How to Disappear Completely, which I think was the first song he used it on. I remember watching some concert in college from the Kid A days, and he would have like 3 Ondes Martenot players on stage with them, crazy stuff from the band that wrote Creep like 5 years earlier. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvWwMhRsRgo

This video might be the best explanation for Creep, which while they never wanted to record it; they do acknowledge it set them up to be able to do everything since. But a lot of Pablo Honey is mediocre.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlhaJqqIfCE

This is also cool; live version of How to Disappear Completely at the start and one of the few Jonny interviews where he speaks. From a documentary on the Ondes Martinot.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B92ZgRSM2tI

Re: Jimi Hendrix was a systems engineer

#242

Post by Slow_Hand »

WalterBright wrote: post #210
Slow_Hand wrote: post #34

Nice article for engineers to understand something that most guitar players will intuitively know. One of the great things about a hi-gain setup like Hendrix's is how the feedback loop will inject an element of controlled chaos into the sound. It allows for emergent fluctuations in timbre that Hendrix can wrangle, but never fully control. It's the squealing, chaotic element in something like his 'Star Spangled Banner…

This leaves me wondering what would happen if you attached a coupling to a trumpet and ran the sound through an effects/feedback box. Why should electric guitars have all the fun?

I like the thought, but trumpets require a lot of energy to excite them (i.e. you have to blow a LOT of air into a horn just to get a note. Getting an instrument like that to feedback would require a pretty radical system.

The difference with electric guitars is that guitar pickups are relatively sensitive and then go through multiple stages of amplification, which makes the system ripe for feedback loops.

Some saxophone players have been known to generate feedback through on-board microphones. Strictly speaking, this isn't exciting the horn, but it does introduce feedback that's excited BY the instrument.

Re: Jimi Hendrix was a systems engineer

#243

Post by Slow_Hand »

jawilson2 wrote: post #233
IAmBroom wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jimmy wasn't as good as Miles at collaboration. Miles always impressed me with his ability to pick the best to back him up, and /then/ let them take the front. Some tracks he barely plays on, waiting minutes for his entry. Jimmy wanted the best to back him up. But I agree with you; I'm just pointing out why I think he didn't.

Agreed! Like Pharaoh's Dance on Bitch's Brew, Davis doesn't come in for like 4 minutes. Same with In A Silent Way. He just lets the band groove for a while, THEN takes the lead. In Davis' autobiography, he mentions trying to work with Jimi. I don't think it would have worked really, but who knows. Jimi was completely self taught, while Miles went to Juliard, I don't see how they would have communicated musically, lit…

Considering that Miles was firmly in a modal music phase at that point, I don't see Jimi's lack of formal training as a hindrance at all. I think he'd be able to hang just fine with Mile's band. Even if Jimi couldn't read changes on a chart, I'm sure he'd have no problem working it out by ear.

Re: Jimi Hendrix was a systems engineer

#244

Post by alephnerd »

jmalicki wrote: post #236
alephnerd wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Isn't Nagle usually introduced in a networking class typically taken by CS (non-CE/EE) undergrads Networking, OS, and Distributed Systems is increasingly treated as CompE or even EE nowadays in the US. > Just because EEs are exposed... That's the thing - I truly do not believe that EE and CS should be decoupled, and I believe ECE as a stopgap is doing a disservice to the talent pipeline we need for my verticals to…

I know multiple people who went to CMU who dropped out of CS to CE because they couldn't handle the rigor of the OS fundamentals course required for the CS major, as the OS course where you had to implement large parts of a kernel was required for CS, but not for CE. Yes, you need solid fundamentals. I am saying CE/EE is not where you get them unless you actually are designing circuits. If you're doing the hard tech…

I agree with that!

The issue is most CS programs in the US don't require a 15-410 style class anymore, or removed much of the more complex content within it.

There's a reason why a CS@CMU degree and a handful of other similar programs that are its peers are well regarded and continue to attract early career recruiters.

That said, I do still feel that the EE/CE/CS shouldn't be treated as different majors and should instead be treated as tracks within the same degree (yes ik what I'm describing is EECS but it ain't wrong), but that shouldn't distract from your overarching point which hits the nail on the head.

Re: Jimi Hendrix was a systems engineer

#245

Post by twangist »

The caption on the photo is clearly wrong. No way the other two are Mitch Mitchell (not "Mitchel" (sic)) or Noel Redding, not at any time when Jimi was alive.

Even after The JH Experience, Noel Redding went on to do the band Fat Mattress, and he still had big curly/wavy hair, no moustache, didn't look or dress like an Arby's manager.

I'm pretty sure that's engineer Eddie Kramer at left. https://www.google.com/search?q=eddie+kramer.

No apparent way to submit corrigenda.

Re: Jimi Hendrix was a systems engineer

#246

Post by WalterBright »

WalterBright wrote: post #210
Slow_Hand wrote: post #34

Nice article for engineers to understand something that most guitar players will intuitively know. One of the great things about a hi-gain setup like Hendrix's is how the feedback loop will inject an element of controlled chaos into the sound. It allows for emergent fluctuations in timbre that Hendrix can wrangle, but never fully control. It's the squealing, chaotic element in something like his 'Star Spangled Banner…

This leaves me wondering what would happen if you attached a coupling to a trumpet and ran the sound through an effects/feedback box. Why should electric guitars have all the fun?

P.S. I learned to play a trumpet when I was a kid. I wasn't any good at it, but I do know how it works!

Re: Jimi Hendrix was a systems engineer

#247

Post by WalterBright »

schrectacular wrote: post #211
WalterBright wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This leaves me wondering what would happen if you attached a coupling to a trumpet and ran the sound through an effects/feedback box. Why should electric guitars have all the fun?

People do! But you have to sit there and buzz your lips to make a trumpet make sound, but for a guitar you just have to shake the strings. And the sound coming from the amp will do this shaking, completing the feedback loop. So it's mostly portable stringed instruments that get this treatment. There are some violin players that play with feedback effects. I hear Jon Rose is one but I am not familiar with his music. F…

There are ways a trumpet could be modified to accept feedback.

Re: Jimi Hendrix was a systems engineer

#248

Post by zigman1 »

cousin_it wrote: post #169
zigman1 wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I only saw Hendrix play live one time I love how nonchalantly you threw this one in. I am proper jealous, how was it? On your first remark, I agree. This is why I love Dire Straits and Mark Knopfler. The studio recordings are amazing, and then you listen to their live stuff and it's even better.

Interestingly, to me Hendrix and Knopfler feel kinda like creative opposites. Knopfler plays much cleaner and with much more variety, he has written many songs that are catchy in different ways (which is almost impossible for any musician), he basically achieves every goal that a beginner musician could choose to chase. And yet his stuff feels like a creative dead end, a dreary road leading to adult contemporary. Whi…

I think what you are trying to say is that Hendrix captured a specific sound and won over a generation of listeners, while Knoplfer displayed a mastery of the instrument, rarely seen in the mainstream. However, don't underestimate him, they sold out Wembley 16 nights in a row in '85, I am sure that spring some bands. It's now a bit forgotten, but for a period of few years, Dire Straits were the biggest band in the world. Knopfler is usually associated with saying "your favorite guitarist's favorite guitarist" :)

Re: Jimi Hendrix was a systems engineer

#249

Post by jawilson2 »

Slow_Hand wrote: post #243
jawilson2 wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed! Like Pharaoh's Dance on Bitch's Brew, Davis doesn't come in for like 4 minutes. Same with In A Silent Way. He just lets the band groove for a while, THEN takes the lead. In Davis' autobiography, he mentions trying to work with Jimi. I don't think it would have worked really, but who knows. Jimi was completely self taught, while Miles went to Juliard, I don't see how they would have communicated musically, lit…

Considering that Miles was firmly in a modal music phase at that point, I don't see Jimi's lack of formal training as a hindrance at all. I think he'd be able to hang just fine with Mile's band. Even if Jimi couldn't read changes on a chart, I'm sure he'd have no problem working it out by ear.

I'd like to think that, I love this period from Davis, and love Hendrix, so it would have been great to see a collab.

In terms of communication, I am thinking of something like the musical equivalent to software design patterns, etc. I.e. imagine two devs are pair coding, one of whom has a CS degree from 2002 and one is skilled but self-taught. While working together, the first starts talking about observer or singleton patterns, which the 2nd has never heard of but has coded something 90% of the way there on intuition. There could be some friction as they establish a common language. (Yes, this is based on experience, with myself more or less on both sides of the exchange at one point or another).

Re: Jimi Hendrix was a systems engineer

#250

Post by jawilson2 »

dwd wrote: post #241
jawilson2 wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes! I always think first of How to Disappear Completely, which I think was the first song he used it on. I remember watching some concert in college from the Kid A days, and he would have like 3 Ondes Martenot players on stage with them, crazy stuff from the band that wrote Creep like 5 years earlier. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvWwMhRsRgo

This video might be the best explanation for Creep, which while they never wanted to record it; they do acknowledge it set them up to be able to do everything since. But a lot of Pablo Honey is mediocre. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlhaJqqIfCE This is also cool; live version of How to Disappear Completely at the start and one of the few Jonny interviews where he speaks. From a documentary on the Ondes Martinot. h…

Very cool! I'm confused why you didn't link the video of Radiohead wearing all black and playing at MTV Spring Break :-).

I was VERY deep into Radiohead in college (early 2000s), and love all of these videos; I'm pretty sure I've seen that 2nd video footage around the time of the Kid A tour, but the dates are wrong. Kid A is probably one of my 5 deserted island albums.

Post reply on HN