Magnum Opus Of The Inglorious Kind - confirmed NOT to be Green Day

[WhiteTim]

1 hour ago, Rogankiwifruit said:

News Just in

https://variety.com/2019/music/news/green-day-fall-out-boy-free-agents-major-labels-1203334125/

 

"If Green Day and Fall Out Boy were to follow Weezer to Crush’s label,"

well they did

https://crushmusic.com/

>Green Day

>Fall Out Boy

>Weezer

They haven’t yet GD is with Crush Management right now they have yet to sign to Crush Music as a label 

[The Bellie]

5 hours ago, green day is said:

I challenge you to explain to me that rain is made of water, where I insist that it's not, and not come off patronizing.

We're debating very fundamental aspects of what pitch-shifting tools are capable of. The reason "my version of this is the only right one" is because I'm making a very basic claim about what's possible with these tools and how it applies to the supposed leaks and the rebuttal is "these tools can't work wonders and do anything you want them to". The "issues" being brought up in regards to this are demonstrably not relevant to this particular case.

 

I don't think I'm the only one with any knowledge but clearly something very basic has been misunderstood, whether it's about the program or about what the point of contention even is.

Okay, if I might have sounded patronizing it was not on the bottom of the subject but on the form, the way you were stating your position to others. (I can be quite sharp in exchanges as well when it comes to the moral field but why would you start... "patronizing"... cause I mean, you did too... for this kind of subject devoid of any morals? like, a technical subject? )

[green day is]

25 minutes ago, The Bellie said:

Okay, if I might have sounded patronizing it was not on the bottom of the subject but on the form, the way you were stating your position to others. (I can be quite sharp in exchanges as well when it comes to the moral field but why would you start... "patronizing"... cause I mean, you did too... for this kind of subject devoid of any morals? like, a technical subject? )

I wasn't accusing you of being patronizing. I was saying that it's not possible to explain fundamental concepts to someone who claims they're wrong (and claims to know better than you why they're wrong) without sounding patronizing. Ie; if you were trying to tell me rain is made of water and I fervently disagreed, could you really explain such a basic thing to me, which everyone familiar with rain should already know, without in some way sounding patronizing?

That's what this is for recutting samples. Anyone who's experimented with melodyne and similar tools for ten minutes knows that it's possible to get a natural sound at a small enough pitch shift and anyone who's used it for fifteen minutes figures out the formant knob goes even further to improve that effect. Personally I wouldn't go more than three semitones, but I'm being conservative and saying one semitone because that's all it takes to materially change a melody into something new.  And this isn't even bringing into account all the other ways to recut a sample, from time stretching (which is now very advanced and produces little artifacting, though even with old software you can get away with it by just doing small stretches) and even chopping up multiple parts and then stitching them back together with minor crossfades and other FX to hide the imperfections. I'm literally just considering the pitch shifting aspect alone, at its most limited form, and even on those grounds the argument doesn't scan. And finally even if we concede that certain limitations can't be exceeded without giving away that it's edited, that has nothing to do with anything because no one set any standard for the extent to which the sample is or isn't edited. The hypothetical faker didn't recut the sample to match a specific thing, they recut it to arbitrary standards, giving them freedom to work exactly within the limitations of what the software allows. If they tried something and it sounded artificial, they hit ctrl Z and tried something more constrained and the result was still something different from the original which was the only goal. 

The entire argument is based on very basic concepts that aren't arguable. Explaining basic concepts to people who misunderstand them is inherently patronizing. The idea that you can listen to a clip of someone singing and say definitively "this could not be achieved through editing", with no concept whatsoever of what level or type of editing supposedly took place, is flawed. It's fundamentally equivalent to saying "I can't detect any editing" with a dose of misplaced arrogance added in. The only way to believe that without arrogance is to believe that all material editing is detectable which is simply not true.

[MrElPacho]

1 hour ago, green day is said:

 

The entire argument is based on very basic concepts that aren't arguable. Explaining basic concepts to people who misunderstand them is inherently patronizing. The idea that you can listen to a clip of someone singing and say definitively "this could not be achieved through editing", with no concept whatsoever of what level or type of editing supposedly took place, is flawed. It's fundamentally equivalent to saying "I can't detect any editing" with a dose of misplaced arrogance added in. The only way to believe that without arrogance is to believe that all material editing is detectable which is simply not true.

But the argument from you originally (and I've heard it from other people too) was that it is "so easy" to produce something that sounded like the leaks. 

If the leaks are fake, then obviously they are from someone who is able to put on a singing voice pretty much identical to BJ, or as you said have taken samples of his voice and added effects, cut them and distorted them so much that the listener can't hear a single hint of what the original lyric was or what it was from. I think if the latter was true, we would probably be able to at least take a guess at what songs the samples were taken from, but nobody has been able to yet. They are completely unrecognisable. I also think if this was true, they would have spent a lot more time than you seem to think on faking this thing. This isn't something that has been slapped together overnight, it is a well-produced, multi-layered sound. What small band would really go to such lengths to troll us? 

So, I'll say again, I challenge you to go and make your own leak. It's really easy apparently, so you should be able to report back quickly with your attempt!  If you want people to believe how easy it is to achieve what the leaks did, prove it. 

[Goofygoldfish]

On 9/13/2019 at 3:12 AM, Todd said:

Is that a challenge? Don't tempt me with a good time. It'd be too easy to trick all of you  

Sorted...

Todd = Dr Robert! 

😂

[green day is]

1 hour ago, MrElPacho said:

But the argument from you originally (and I've heard it from other people too) was that it is "so easy" to produce something that sounded like the leaks. 

Easy in the sense that anyone with experience with these tools (which is many people, as they've been available to consumers for over a decade) can do it.

1 hour ago, MrElPacho said:

I think if the latter was true, we would probably be able to at least take a guess at what songs the samples were taken from, but nobody has been able to yet.

I never claimed that this is definitively a recut sample, only that the idea that it's not possible to do such a thing is fundamentally not true. Which is factual. Stop trying to attach the argument I'm making to an entirely different argument with a conveniently higher burden of proof. That's not what I'm talking about.

1 hour ago, MrElPacho said:

I also think if this was true, they would have spent a lot more time than you seem to think on faking this thing. This isn't something that has been slapped together overnight, it is a well-produced, multi-layered sound.

You're severely overestimating how long something like this takes. Assuming it is a recut, the instrumental probably already existed and the tiny vocal sample would not take long at all to modify. Finishing touches can vary but moving certain parts by a semitone or two, time stretching certain parts, and cutting with crossfading (as examples) wouldn't take long. If those things do take you a long time........... I'm sorry about your incompetence. It gets easier I promise.

Also I don't remember putting a timescale on this. Ever. So idk what you think "a lot more time than I seem to think" even is. Seems like you're making a whole lot of inferences about my views that I never stated at all and trying to use those to support your misunderstanding of the point in contention and the facts surrounding it.

[Thatsername]

9 hours ago, Adorkable said:

None of what is going on with this album makes any sense to me whatsoever. Would you mock someone that is still your boss when they still have to support you?

I actually think this is exactly what they're doing. The album-cover mocking their own masterpiece. "Father of all Mockers". "Songs for assholes". Their general "fuck you" attitude. Not giving a shit and just doing the promo stuff because they have to (at least that's my feeling - in those interviews they don't seem to be into it at all, everything seems forced). It all seems like they are fulfilling their contract by doing everything that's expected of them, but not more. They're doing it half-assed. It'll be exciting to see what they'll do when the album is finally out and they don't have to play that role anymore.

[MrElPacho]

29 minutes ago, green day is said:

Easy in the sense that anyone with experience with these tools (which is many people, as they've been available to consumers for over a decade) can do it.

I never claimed that this is definitively a recut sample, only that the idea that it's not possible to do such a thing is fundamentally not true. Which is factual. Stop trying to attach the argument I'm making to an entirely different argument with a conveniently higher burden of proof. That's not what I'm talking about.

You're severely overestimating how long something like this takes. Assuming it is a recut, the instrumental probably already existed and the tiny vocal sample would not take long at all to modify. Finishing touches can vary but moving certain parts by a semitone or two, time stretching certain parts, and cutting with crossfading (as examples) wouldn't take long. If those things do take you a long time........... I'm sorry about your incompetence. It gets easier I promise.

Also I don't remember putting a timescale on this. Ever. So idk what you think "a lot more time than I seem to think" even is. Seems like you're making a whole lot of inferences about my views that I never stated at all and trying to use those to support your misunderstanding of the point in contention and the facts surrounding it.

See, my main problem with the way you're speaking to people right now is that you're acting like a know it all and not providing any substantial evidence that it is as easy as you say to create a fake leak.

I'll say for like, the fifth time now, if it's so easy to create a track like the leaks, do it. You're all talk and not much evidence tbh. If you can come back with something that sounds remotely as good as the leaks you might start winning people over to your argument. 

Otherwise you're just rubbing people up the wrong way by calling them "incompetent" and claiming their small minds can't understand what you can. 

[dannygreen]

1 hour ago, MrElPacho said:

But the argument from you originally (and I've heard it from other people too) was that it is "so easy" to produce something that sounded like the leaks. 

If the leaks are fake, then obviously they are from someone who is able to put on a singing voice pretty much identical to BJ, or as you said have taken samples of his voice and added effects, cut them and distorted them so much that the listener can't hear a single hint of what the original lyric was or what it was from. I think if the latter was true, we would probably be able to at least take a guess at what songs the samples were taken from, but nobody has been able to yet. They are completely unrecognisable. I also think if this was true, they would have spent a lot more time than you seem to think on faking this thing. This isn't something that has been slapped together overnight, it is a well-produced, multi-layered sound. What small band would really go to such lengths to troll us? 

So, I'll say again, I challenge you to go and make your own leak. It's really easy apparently, so you should be able to report back quickly with your attempt!  If you want people to believe how easy it is to achieve what the leaks did, prove it. 

Leave him/her alone really, he's gonna answer you untill you're worn out using high sounding words and calling you an incompetent because he/ she is the only one in the world knowing the matter. Forgetting that being arrogant and offensive puts you always in a defective position towards other people. I've never had time for these kind of people, not open to talk (we're In a community exchanging ideas in a civil way) and with no education. We should just let this go and go on with the topic 🙂

[green day is]

1 hour ago, MrElPacho said:

See, my main problem with the way you're speaking to people right now is that you're acting like a know it all and not providing any substantial evidence that it is as easy as you say to create a fake leak.

 

1 hour ago, dannygreen said:

Leave him/her alone really, he's gonna answer you untill you're worn out using high sounding words and calling you an incompetent because he/ she is the only one in the world knowing the matter. Forgetting that being arrogant and offensive puts you always in a defective position towards other people. I've never had time for these kind of people, not open to talk (we're In a community exchanging ideas in a civil way) and with no education. We should just let this go and go on with the topic 🙂

Translation: "I can't argue these basic concepts, because I was wrong about them, so I'm gonna focus on your tone instead."

 

Transposing something by a matter of a semitone or two doesn't produce noticeable digital artifacts, especially combined with light formant shifting to mask it. Transposing key notes in a melody by a semitone or two can fundamentally change the melody, even changing the contour. It's one basic concept regarding pitch-shifting tools and one regarding basic theory. Argue it.

 

Also your description of typical production/theory jargon as "high sounding words" is duly noted : )

[AngelBlue_]

Did you guys see the cover of the next The darkness album? 😂

 

https://imgur.com/a/fGbMdGR

 

Edit: Sorry I had to ... https://imgur.com/a/1FRqk8A

[MrElPacho]

1 hour ago, green day is said:

 

Translation: "I can't argue these basic concepts, because I was wrong about them, so I'm gonna focus on your tone instead."

 

Transposing something by a matter of a semitone or two doesn't produce noticeable digital artifacts, especially combined with light formant shifting to mask it. Transposing key notes in a melody by a semitone or two can fundamentally change the melody, even changing the contour. It's one basic concept regarding pitch-shifting tools and one regarding basic theory. Argue it.

 

Also your description of typical production/theory jargon as "high sounding words" is duly noted : )

Last time before I give up, if you can create a leaked track so easily, do it. 

[BilIie Joe Armstrong]

This conspiracy theory is underestimating Green Day's ability to do absolute bullshit and be serious about it.

[Stefano Bras]

15 hours ago, Platypus2000 said:

This will all be majorly irrelevant after the album drops, and the tour ends and we don't get anything else for another two years, you're all clutching at straws. I believe there's more music but to suggest we'll get something 2-4 months after the new one is released is just absurd to me. I honestly think they they just mean a shorter wait for new music as in 1-2 years as opposed to 4-5 years. 

They literally said they maybe will release another album before the tour, literally.

[greenjoc]

16 hours ago, 17Gonzalo said:

Is not a "bad" album but is (fighting close with DOS!) the worst Green Day album (at least for me)... I don't like Green Day playing "garage rock". It could be OK for a side project or a trilogy but not for 3 years waiting expectations.

I completely agree! Maybe a release under FBHT laughing at Green Day ending their contract and vandalizing their biggest artwork would be understandable for me.

[Guest]

Finally got the time to read through this thread and I'm shooketh while also feeling y'all need to unicorn up. 

[herewegoagain]

^^ Same except I'm mainly shooketh not to find a single   in the ultimate   thread ()

[realDonaldTrump]

what the fuck

[Stefano Bras]

47 minutes ago, ImNotInGreenDaydummy said:

what the fuck

[Vthefifth]

https://www.greendayfans.com/news/studio-teases-and-possible-album-art-leak/

 

I don't care what anybody says that is Billie singing in the background, especially in the second and fourth clips.  There is also this mysterious songsforassholes instagram page.  Billie said flat out in an interview that "maybe we'll release another album next year because we are off our contract with Warner."

[realDonaldTrump]

3 minutes ago, Stefano Bras said:

Winnie is so tempting in that pic 

[DookieLukie]

Green Day seems to go through phases in their music. They followed Dookie with a fuck you, fast paced album. Followed the serious tone of Warning with the Network. Followed AI by cutting loose with the Tubbies. Followed 21CB with the "party feel" of the Trilogy. Now they're following a solemn RevRad album with a fun little chaos record. Next record will probably be serious with plenty of long songs.

[petros]

5 minutes ago, DookieLukie said:

Next record will probably be serious with plenty of long songs.

One can only dream.

I love stop drop and roll wouldn't mind it as a green day album. But the trilogy is too bad for me and this new song is okay but forgettable. 

[DookieLukie]

23 minutes ago, petros said:

One can only dream.

I love stop drop and roll wouldn't mind it as a green day album. But the trilogy is too bad for me and this new song is okay but forgettable. 

Stop Drop and Roll is one of the BEST GD albums. Wish they released it under their name. Everyone I show it to loves it and is so surprised it's Green Day.

[Westerberg89]

I think this Foamf record is basically a Foxboro Hot Tubs record. But they’ve released it under Warner to fulfil their contractual obligations.

Soon as it’s out, it’s old. That’s the music industry these days, so once it’s out I believe that we will get Opus Magnum. At least I hope