And so on::
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.
Yes, I think we agree that there is a lot more junk being put out
into the public machine, but that has nothing to do with software
based music production being a valid or invalid tool for music
making. It's simply opened up a tool that unfortunately more and
more people will misuse... just like anything else in life.
This one is new and you aren't ready to accept the ones who are
misusing it, or simply haven't refined their skills.
What if Bob Dylan... say at 12 years old... could barely play his
guitar... could barely write or sing anything meaningful yet because
he hadn't matured as an artist... what if he recorded himself and
somehow got those recordings out in public for consumption-- like we
can do now on the internet. Would that somehow be legitimate as
compared to the bedroom hacks with their bit torrent software?
Are samplers evil because MC Hammer
and Puff Daddy blatantly misused them?
the difference is that one thing is NOT creative.
So the people that used samplers uncreatively have ruined all use of
samplers for everyone else? Anyone that has used a sampler
creatively is dismissed because people like "Puffy" needed to cash in?
and of course that
isnt satisfying to many people. the lack of creativity is what makes
most computer music unsatisfying to me.
So you're hearing a lot of uncreative music. Blame the artist.
I hear a lot of garbage too... and then there a lot of music that I
really enjoy. I celebrate those artists for their creativity. The
glass is half full... maybe it's 1/3 full... or 1/10... maybe only
you can decide that for yourself, but I'm thankful that the good
music was able to be made by whatever tool the artist found worked
best for him/her.
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?
The point is there is performance and then there is
composition. Beethoven was a brilliant composer, as there are
many... they weren't out there playing the songs but they were behind
making the music in the first place.
Some people have a brilliant vision, but performance isn't actually
their priority... they just want to make good music, and good being
whatever direction they have chosen.
Stephen Hawking doesn't keep it real. He's a hack.
uh, okay?
Stephen Hawking is a brilliant man, but the only way he can
communicate with us is through a computer.
It is an extreme... but there are many levels between that and
someone that just picks up a guitar and shoves noise down your throat
*oh my god, sonic orgasm... I can't control myself!*... which some
songs remind me of... no control... no restraint... but, that is my
personal taste... and not every day either. It changes with my moods.
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.
Sound does matter to some, and not others. A lot of times I'm
approaching a composition an ear-- or eye-- closer to that of a
director of a movie.. I'm thinking about soundtracks... the use of
'space' or an environment.
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.
I like Rush for their lyrics actually... some of the best lyrics of
popular music... they don't write love songs, or scream about the
government, or rebel for sake of being rebellious... Neil Peart is
also an amazing percussionist.... he actually wrote all of their lyrics.
I like punk for why I like punk. If I listen to punk, I don't want
to hear Rush.
You like the 'sound' of punk but you do not like the 'sound' of
Rush. It's your prerogative.
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.
Most people that pick up any instrument in the beginning will first
try to emulate "person X" that they look up to... they first need to
know they 'can' make music, and making music by their standards will
be to be able to emulate their hero... then, in good time they find
their own voice... if they are true.
I started with a good friend of mine sounding like depeche mode and
all the techno pop bands of the 80's while we were learning how to
make music... Later on I found my own voice, and I'm still working on it.
There will always be knock-offs and people that are trying to cash in
on their own lack of creativity. It's just more obvious now than ever.
Early house music was great... and it probably got worse over time
because people that are progressive thinkers are usually also the
most creative... so they got bored and wanted to advance onto
something new. That's what makes most good creative works in the
first place... people that can't sit still and just 'have' to figure
out something new.
Isn't that striving towards something
groundbreaking?
no.
See my point below about simply making something nobody has heard
doesn't necessarily make it good... otherwise you are just being
antagonistic for the sake of being antagonistic.
I used to do that to my parents.
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"?
No, but most of them wouldn't make any sense at all...
but then... someone has an original thought. Oh no! That's not the
poetic dribble I'm used to! Crucify him!
Perhaps George Carlin's bit about 'sentences that have never been
spoken' was one of those original ideas I've been talking about. It
made you laugh didn't it? Maybe that's why he gets recognition...
for being original.
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,
I've already said that a few times. And "if you sucked before on
real gear, you're probably going to suck now with software."
I'm arguing here that you don't dismiss the creative people because
of those people who suck.
All music that comes out of a computer does not suck. All music that
is played on a guitar does not suck.
and so on...
or have
more skill. their music would still be good if it was made on an
acoustic guitar.
Possibly, if they knew how to play an acoustic guitar... or would
it? What if they just didn't think in terms of the sounds and music
that a guitar can produce? It wouldn't move them, and they would
have no interest in it. What if they are moved and inspired by the
sounds they can create in their PC, but no other 'real-world' instruments?
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.
Ever hear the term, "Throwing the baby out with the bathwater" ?
Again, yes people can use the computer for less-than-noble goals, as
we can use *any* tool for less than noble goals. I don't know why
all of your anger is directed towards a computer...
Perhaps you've spent years gathering up some equipment in a studio
and now you're pissed off that other people can surpass your hardware
studio within days if they chose to?
I spent 20 years gathering equipment in my studio... I resisted
software at first, but finally realized I was just used to my status
quo and was hesitating to take the plunge. Things change.... either
get on board or become some local house band playing covers of the
innovators, or a wedding DJ. Cheers.
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.
Again, why are you only focusing on computers. I hear the same $hit
every day on the radio--at least on the days I actually turn it
on. There are people all over the world using their tools
inappropriately... not just computers, the focus of your obsession.
I don't know about you, but I can tell what is trash and what
isn't. If someone isn't at least attempting to be innovating then
they can rely on prefab programs and beats to make something we've
all heard before, but a whole lot worse. We know it. You know
it.... well I hope you know it. Maybe not all listeners will know
it-- but not all listeners know anything anyway. People turn on the
radio everyday in anticipation of their favorite song, songs that
would probably make you and I cringe. Oh well... there's no
accounting for taste.
This is artistic integrity, and it has *always* been an issue with
music, not just since computers got involved. Please open your mind
to this. Many rules and principles of life can be found across the boards.
I can mainstream this for you:
The movie Spiderman (haha)... "Peter, with great power comes great
responsibility"
-----------*that was the best place to *snip**
