| -----Original Message----- | From: laura gavoor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 6:19 PM | | A. Will ever-elevating recording technology equally elevate | imagination or have the opposite effect...or both??
Both, I reckon. The leap of imagination that was "Acid Trax" back in the day is much easier for people to achieve now. Some would say that elevating recording technology cheapens that sort of imagination, but it actually doesn't - it just raises the stakes. Easier to express imagination at a more basic or easy level, but harder to produce something so imaginative it stands out from the burgeoning crowd of Pierre-clones... | B. If both....how then does one gage or distinguish true | musicianship and talent from creativity/imagination/ | uniqueness in composition?? "Musicianship" is a bit of an odd term; a lot of the music discussed on this list isn't the product of "musicianship" as such, more the creativity/imagination/uniqueness you mention. People who are skilled at musicianship will be as easy to spot as always, but (and I might be being a bit heretical here) the role of the pure musician (ie, no composing, just playing) will continue to become more like that of the calligrapher today. On the other hand, new forms of musicianship come with new instruments. Turntablists, for example, or the way some producers can rock a 303 live on stage while others can't. Bernie Worrell and Marvin Gaye's synth playing, working on the sound at the same time as on the melody. I can imagine some amazing futuristic instruments which could usher in a new age for musicianship... But you're right, boring people will continue to make boring music, weird people will go on making weird stuff, and so on... the cycle of life continues... and no old technology ever gets uninvented (apart from Body Rap...). Brendan --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
