On 8/31/06, Dale Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
For every hack artist that installs some software and declares themselves a musician there are hundreds of individuals in the past who picked up a guitar and thought they were rock stars.
it could be that it was like that in the past. but i bet the number right now of people who own a computer without making music is far more than the number of people who own a guitar that sits around for no reason. so for those people, it takes almost no effort to DL and install any variety of music software, whereas if you wanna play guitar youve gotta go out and buy a guitar, learn how to play it (no matter how basic your music is going to be), and find people to play in a band with, and then on top of that either buy or borrow equipment to actually record and mixdown said music. with a laptop, you can do everything and have it posted on the web in under 2 hours. you dont even have to have any idea how to physically play any instrument, you can just point and click with your mouse, a technique many people already have mastered! we're only at the start of the use of computers to make music, really. and if the quality keeps going down the way it has been, one day people will be yearning for the early 00's.
Dylan knows how to play guitar, etc... Kraftwerk knows how to work their synthesizers (and they use a computer as their sequencer--if not having moved completely over to software synthesis in their own studio already)... hell, *I* know how to work synthesizers too... Producing sound in real-time within the computer is just another tool. Either you're good at it or you aren't. Some get the A grade... others get the F... and a whole lot of in between.
the problem with the tool of course is that it requires nothing in addition to work. no techiques, no abilities, nothing. hell, you can even get sample packs on the web of every drum machine ever and use them all. nothing at all is required to get going. which i appreciate in theory. in practice however, it makes people really lazy and more than willing to just copy and bite things left and right. if you want to start a band or even just use a hardware electronic music studio, its going to require 10 times more thought and effort just to get going than it is to make a remedial track in most software apps. that efforts weeds out jokers. not all of them, unfortunately, but alot of them.
Personally, if we're talking about tools, I only use Live and one plug-in, which is simply a synthesizer that I like. I've rarely even read a manual for a piece of gear. I've figured out all of the synthesis parameters out there myself, and have usually stayed out of gear discussions because I already had the tools/gear I wanted and really didn't care about anything else. I was never a gear head, I am a music head. There are so many people out there that are exactly the same way... many that have strolled in and out of this list over the years.
for all these music heads, where is the good music? are they just not working hard enough? too many people bite the trendy style, too many people follow the paint by numbers method of making music in genre X. and that isnt limited to computer users, but it seems extremely prevalent amongst them.
Yes, every morning I wake up, turn on my computer, double-click the Live 5.0 icon on my desktop, and press return. The songs just come pouring out. Check my page. It's astounding. I hope nobody else figures out what program I use. I'll be ruined.
hey man, YOU might not. but many other people do just use their programs in the same old way and make the same old crap. im not gonna say what i feel about your tracks because this isnt what the discussion is about. but i bet you can guess.
>>Did you receive my point about all the new technologies in music... >>or even art in general, such as photography, always receiving >>resistance in their infancy? > >its not really a new point, Extraneous insult ignored.
which extraneous insult was that?
You may understand it, but I'm not sure if the point is sinking in. Is photography art? If so, why? All you have to do is press a button. Some people make masterpieces with their Polaroids while others make trash with their elaborate camera systems.... and vice versa.
but the point is that if you try to substitute the elaborate setup for talent, it doesnt work! but thats not really where the true difference is. what a photo does is the same as what music does, it captures a feeling. think of it as the difference between someone who takes candid shots vs someone who sets up their shots. thats really where the difference comes in more. you can elaborate in setting up a photo and suck all the interesting things out of the subject that were there when you got the inspiration to frame it the way you want it in the first place. worrying about lighting and whatnot doesnt matter if youre not getting the feeling across. and thats the same thing that computers open up in music. they allow you to mess with things on such a small level, make them "perfect". which of course is what sucks all the humanity out of it. you can just concentrate on the technical aspects of it because it requires only knowledge, not talent or creativity. its obvious across all genres of electronic music from jungle to techno to IDM. the computers allow wankery that just distracts from what music is about: feeling.
I'm also a designer. Should we dismiss all of the art and design of today that was made with a computer? I love progressive design, but there is a lot of garbage out there and I cringe at something awful I see every single day. Do I blame the tool? Blame the artist.
yeah, but obviously there are ALOT more artists out there doing stuff and putting it out there because of the easy availability of computers. so theres a ton more artists putting out a ton more crap. and unfortunately, there arent nearly as many design fans as there are music fans. and music fans can only take so much crap music.
Samplers. Some people sample entire loops of other people's music, add a beat, and sing over it. Other people use a sampler to record just a drum kick, the sound of a glass breaking, or their grandmother belching, then rework it and use it successfully in a track as an instrument. Are samplers evil because MC Hammer and Puff Daddy blatantly misused them?
the difference is that one thing is NOT creative. and of course that isnt satisfying to many people. the lack of creativity is what makes most computer music unsatisfying to me.
What if someone had a disease of some sort, like Parkinson's, where they just couldn't keep their hands steady, but they had a brilliant mind just overflowing with creative vision, and the computer allowed them to finally bring those visions to reality and share them with us? Are they not keeping it real?
thats a single hypothetical person. how many of those are there really? and how many of them are making good music?
Stephen Hawking doesn't keep it real. He's a hack.
uh, okay?
I have sounds in my head that I've never heard in real life and I've still never been able to get them out, but with software I'm a little bit closer. I'm sorry if the sound I want to use in a song isn't made by an analog synth, korg wavestation, guitar, ukelele, tribal drum, leaf blower, car crash, or anything else found in the universe today.
youre missing the whole point though! the SOUND doesnt matter. at all, really. its why old punk sounds so much more captivating than Rush. i dont care how much better Rush's equipment is, their energy and feeling was overwrought and contrived. punk got straight to the point, and thats why people loved it. the same holds true for dance music. i love disco music, but there was an obvious tendency to go way over the top in producing it and it resulted in many many many poor records. of course, the knock off that went for that same FEELING, early house music, is really what it's all about. they kept it simple, and didnt worry about trying to sound like disco producer X.
Isn't that striving towards something groundbreaking?
no.
Trying to realize something that no one has ever heard before?
have you ever seen the george carlin bit about "sentences that have never been spoken"?
Many people are trying to achieve this goal using the computer. Alternately, though, simply making a sound that no one has heard yet doesn't make it good. You still need creativity and skill to make it worthy of recognition.
exactly. but using computers doesnt make people more creative, or have more skill. their music would still be good if it was made on an acoustic guitar. look at someone like basic channel. genres worth of knockoffs (glitch house or whatever pretty much was born out of the BC/CR sound, as well as tons of crappy dubby techno ripoffs) of their music have emerged, with people using increasingly complex equipment to try to achieve that feeling that they did with crappy broken sounding old gear. and of course no one can touch those guys.
So many tools at our disposal... and it is up to the individual to use them in good conscience.
and do you trust people to do that? especially when its VERY easy to NOT? i know i don't.
More complex for no reason? I find music production in the PC much simpler, and satisfying.
unless you have a ridiculous home studio, you are limited by the number of channels in your mixer, the number of EFX units and synths you have, etc. in the computer, theyre all just a click away. you can easily have 200 tracks, with ridiculous amounts of EFX on each channel. and the music still wont be AT ALL better than what the chicago house cats made on a 4 track cassette multitrack, much less 12.5 times better. so if you count simple as "not having to think" then you are right. and i dont think that not thinking is a good thing! becoming one with your setup so that you no longer have to think is one thing (and its something i think every musician is aiming for). but just clicking away until something sounds different isnt anything.
To set up my old studio I had to first plug in a network of AC/DC supply, then hook up a network of patch cables to my mixer, then hook up a network of midi cables to my sequencer.
man, plugging stuff in is SOOOOOO tough!
I could spend hours and hours trying to get rid of line noise, unsuccessfully resetting up my synths to sound just like they did the week before so I can finish a track I was working on before I was inspired to work on another idea, etc... etc...
you gotta learn to work faster. and learn how to set your stuff up. i set my personal stuff up once, and other than things breaking, its not a problem to swap things in and out. and if youre truly going to compare, you have to point out the issues with soundcard drivers and plugins not working properly and all the other computer related (not even music related, computer technology related!) problems that pop up in every music production forum on the web.
All of the same tools now exist in the computer. There are synthesizers, samplers, mixers, and sequencers at my fingertips. It is the same thing I have been doing for years but much more stable
more stable? your hardware synths been crashing on you?
and intertwined for much better mix quality. I've spent at least $15,000 over the years on gear and never came close to a mix quality that I have in the PC... I would need to rent an outside studio to do that.... and who wants to leave their house at 3am to explore music in someone else's studio?... or spend the money if they don't have to?
WHY CARE WHAT YOUR "MIX QUALITY" IS LIKE? do you really think your tracks are better than larry heard's "can you feel it"? i dont think he was very worried about "mix quality" at the time. if youre worrying about things like this, youre not worried about the feeling. youre worried about nonsense that has nothing to do with the music. it has to do with some hi-fi nerd circle jerk.
It's so simple isn't it? 1) Software production has raised the bar significantly. It is easier for a skilled artist to make a more well-produced track.
again, who cares how well produced something is? its totally irrelevent. the only thing that matters if it a song hits emotional chords. never in my life has production value hit an emotional chord with me.
2) There is one huge liability to the development of making music entirely within the PC, and that is Bit Torrent. Anyone with an internet connection can download software to their heart's content and call themselves a producer. No longer are aspiring electronic musicians bound to spending thousands upon thousands of dollars to get their studio up and running.
they never were before, either. at least when the music was about a feeling and not about "professional sound quality". when this music was invented, heads were rocking crappy synths and drum machines that no one wanted. they were insanely limited, but they used them because they could afford them. and those limitations FORCED them to squeeze out emotionally captivating recordings. the more money came into the process, the more it became about buying more, newer equipment, and the music paid the price.
You speak of the quality of music not increasing in direct proportion to the complexity of the equipment, and you are correct, but there are more factors involved that you haven't considered and I believe your skepticism to be misguided. Further, this does not discount the accomplishments of truly gifted artists... and for them the quality of music is progressing rapidly.
what factors am i not considering? all i see is people spending time and energy on tracks where all theyre worried about is the mixdown or the 24 bit effects or whatever. they should be spending time making stuff that sounds GOOD. not "Well produced". GOOD.
There is simply more trash for you to weed through, as there has been for every other form of music as the instruments and tools they used became more readily available... and now distribution is also at the hands of anyone with an internet connection. You can download the same amount of trash from any other genre popular today. Electronic music is no different.
i dont agree. this year ive definitely bought more new non-techno and house records than i have in those genres. this is music that i love, and its being polluted more and more with crap to the point where the good is almost impossible to find. and i care about finding music alot more than the average person.
"All I need is a red guitar, three chords, and the truth"? What was he talking about there? Part of it was a complaint about how easy it is/was for anyone to make it as a musician-- Pick one of three chords? ie: Press return? No, there is no comparison there.
dood, i seriously think you have no idea how to interpret what people are saying. the point of that was IT WAS THE TRUTH THAT MADE THE MUSIC, way moreso than the guitar and 3 chords. the quote is saying that all you need is the most rudimentary equipment and a good idea and you can make timeless music. that was the point.
Regardless, the world is much more complex than I think you want to see it, but that is reality. There are many things to consider in any issue that arises. This applies to all facets of life.
youre right. i guess ill consider the fact that home studios have made tons of money for certain companies. and the idea of making music computer based instead of based on old machines that no one is making money selling (aside from people on ebay with the "classic" stuff, but f*ck that nonsense too. its why i dont have a 909, 808, 303, etc), and yet people are so quick to buy into their product because its "better" or "easier" to make music with. what a joke. there are many complex issues at work here, but the end result is all the same: techno and house music suck right now. really hard.
As far as music is concerned there have always been hacks, and as time goes by many of them become more easily recognized. If they are using a pre-fab beat programs full of presets, then people are going to ask why they sound like so many other artists out there and get bored or dismiss them entirely.
we've already seen the rise and fall of one music based on a software gimmick: glitch stuff. akufen today doesnt seem like quite the genius he was 6 years ago, does he? it's going to happen to more genres tomorrow. my guess is "minimal" will go next. though i guess by then, some people might find new subgenres to leech off of..... tmo
