Electronic Music SUCKS!!!
-
hacktheplanet
- Posts: 2846
- Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 6:37 am
- Location: Chicago, IL
- Contact:
-
noisetonepause
- Posts: 4938
- Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2002 3:38 pm
- Location: Sticks and stones
Well, true. To some extent.kennerb wrote:There is a quote that Jerry Garcia made to David Grisman when David was saying he wanted him to drop the electric guitar and play acoustic.
He told him
"David once you put a microphone in front of something it's all electronic."
Never thought I'd quote Jerry but I think it's a good point. It's what your ears hear and not how it gets there that matters.
But if you're saying that an electric guitar is the same as an acoustic once it's recorded, you're so wrong it's not even funny! TBH I think acoustic instruments are more musical than electric ones when played right. I know I prefer the control a classical guitar gives me when compared to electrics - but for most of what I do, the sound of an electric guitar is preferable, and it's easier to capture anyways.
Still a sucker for drum machines though. I dearly love Shostakovich, but I do prefer Daft Punk... on fridays...
-Paws
-
chrysalis33rpm
- Posts: 1020
- Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 9:56 pm
- Location: San Francisco
OK firstly, I love the Jerry Garcia quote, and I think the guy who started this thread was attempting humor or some such as somebody noted above.
But can one instrument be more "musical" than another? Is one sound really inherently musical, and another not? Could this be? It's important, because it (in)validates a whole generation of musical(?) technique. If we can say that acoustic guitars are just more musical than electric guitars, I think we can equally say that all traditional forms of instruments are more musical than all electronic instruments- which is not true, IMO.
Another point: "Electronic music" is not synonymous to "synthesized sounds". Electronic music is a way of thinking about music, and a way of composing, and may often include only sampled sounds of traditional instruments, unmodified- in this case it is the sequencing instrument and the sampling techniques (Live we love you) which makes the way these traditional instruments are used electronic. (And this is what the Jerry Garcia quote above starts to get at).
BTW, very similar protests to those we hear about electronic music were made at the invention of the camera regarding its relationship to the traditional art form, painting (saying it the new technology is somehow less valid than the old). In the end, the camera has had a profound effect on painting, but has certainly not made it irrelevant. It has made it express different modes, rather than focus on the precise recording of reality (which the camera generally does better and faster).
We live, since the 50's, in an electronic culture. It's a one way trip; we're not going back. To call the the methods of the past better is nostalgic, and it ignores the possibility we have today, which is the same artists have at any time and place in history: to do the best we are able with what is available, the techniques and tools of the epoch.
But can one instrument be more "musical" than another? Is one sound really inherently musical, and another not? Could this be? It's important, because it (in)validates a whole generation of musical(?) technique. If we can say that acoustic guitars are just more musical than electric guitars, I think we can equally say that all traditional forms of instruments are more musical than all electronic instruments- which is not true, IMO.
Another point: "Electronic music" is not synonymous to "synthesized sounds". Electronic music is a way of thinking about music, and a way of composing, and may often include only sampled sounds of traditional instruments, unmodified- in this case it is the sequencing instrument and the sampling techniques (Live we love you) which makes the way these traditional instruments are used electronic. (And this is what the Jerry Garcia quote above starts to get at).
BTW, very similar protests to those we hear about electronic music were made at the invention of the camera regarding its relationship to the traditional art form, painting (saying it the new technology is somehow less valid than the old). In the end, the camera has had a profound effect on painting, but has certainly not made it irrelevant. It has made it express different modes, rather than focus on the precise recording of reality (which the camera generally does better and faster).
We live, since the 50's, in an electronic culture. It's a one way trip; we're not going back. To call the the methods of the past better is nostalgic, and it ignores the possibility we have today, which is the same artists have at any time and place in history: to do the best we are able with what is available, the techniques and tools of the epoch.
First, for me, electronic in regard of music means (has ment) the utbreak from mainstream music done by those people using tapes and computers in the 40th(?) and forth. (Jazz and modern art music did it also in the accoustic realm.) Now the term seems to mean loop based, break based dance/techno/remixed etc music.
Then, "electronic" has not only become a production and style term, but is also (like the case for pictures and information in a whole) a distribution form. Which takes us far into thinking about the whole chain: production, distribution, economy etc. And what that does for creativity, taste and listening conditions.
It would be foolish (but cool) to have a live orchestra in every elevator.
We now about the McLuhan phrase "the media is the message". It has some relevance, but i think its more of a situation thing, like the room (mentally, social etc) where we and the music meet (or just passes).
The same tune on the same pan flute is quite different when met on a hill in Chile, played by a little boy or girl then heard recorded out of the radio or played by the same person in a concert environment.
I heard a german composer talk about the live situation, listening to a concert performance, as very different from listenening to a recording. Because, simply put, the recording you can turn off. It's like the difference between a live play and a video take of the same play.
A swedish singer that does perform in schools at times, noticed that her voice, her very physical being, could be embarrasing for the children, as if they felt they came to close to "reality". Which meant they did not hear but reacted as they would like to withdraw.
I could gone on for ever about this. I don't know and I strongly feel the urge to chose a stand and a direction. Would the devil come and offer me the choice of being a good jazz pianist if I dropped the laptop in the trash, I would maybe accept the deal.
On the other hand, I would like to use electronics in a way to make contact where the mainstream music fails (for me).
// C
Then, "electronic" has not only become a production and style term, but is also (like the case for pictures and information in a whole) a distribution form. Which takes us far into thinking about the whole chain: production, distribution, economy etc. And what that does for creativity, taste and listening conditions.
It would be foolish (but cool) to have a live orchestra in every elevator.
We now about the McLuhan phrase "the media is the message". It has some relevance, but i think its more of a situation thing, like the room (mentally, social etc) where we and the music meet (or just passes).
The same tune on the same pan flute is quite different when met on a hill in Chile, played by a little boy or girl then heard recorded out of the radio or played by the same person in a concert environment.
I heard a german composer talk about the live situation, listening to a concert performance, as very different from listenening to a recording. Because, simply put, the recording you can turn off. It's like the difference between a live play and a video take of the same play.
A swedish singer that does perform in schools at times, noticed that her voice, her very physical being, could be embarrasing for the children, as if they felt they came to close to "reality". Which meant they did not hear but reacted as they would like to withdraw.
I could gone on for ever about this. I don't know and I strongly feel the urge to chose a stand and a direction. Would the devil come and offer me the choice of being a good jazz pianist if I dropped the laptop in the trash, I would maybe accept the deal.
On the other hand, I would like to use electronics in a way to make contact where the mainstream music fails (for me).
// C
PC Laptop Acer, XP Home SP2, build in crappy sound card.
Bleeps and Blops!
http://bluemoose.greatnow.com/
Bleeps and Blops!
http://bluemoose.greatnow.com/
Thank you very much for this!
It brings a lot to a point. Its true, i brought up this thread because we had a discussion yesterday night at a gig in the http://www.fluc.at/ in Vienna. It was mainly about electronic digital music and its 1/0.
There is one major thing about all that. The resolution of digital sound...never ending story...but I strongly think, that our brain is recognizing endless resolution.
It brings a lot to a point. Its true, i brought up this thread because we had a discussion yesterday night at a gig in the http://www.fluc.at/ in Vienna. It was mainly about electronic digital music and its 1/0.
There is one major thing about all that. The resolution of digital sound...never ending story...but I strongly think, that our brain is recognizing endless resolution.
chrysalis33rpm wrote:OK firstly, I love the Jerry Garcia quote, and I think the guy who started this thread was attempting humor or some such as somebody noted above.
But can one instrument be more "musical" than another? Is one sound really inherently musical, and another not? Could this be? It's important, because it (in)validates a whole generation of musical(?) technique. If we can say that acoustic guitars are just more musical than electric guitars, I think we can equally say that all traditional forms of instruments are more musical than all electronic instruments- which is not true, IMO.
Another point: "Electronic music" is not synonymous to "synthesized sounds". Electronic music is a way of thinking about music, and a way of composing, and may often include only sampled sounds of traditional instruments, unmodified- in this case it is the sequencing instrument and the sampling techniques (Live we love you) which makes the way these traditional instruments are used electronic. (And this is what the Jerry Garcia quote above starts to get at).
BTW, very similar protests to those we hear about electronic music were made at the invention of the camera regarding its relationship to the traditional art form, painting (saying it the new technology is somehow less valid than the old). In the end, the camera has had a profound effect on painting, but has certainly not made it irrelevant. It has made it express different modes, rather than focus on the precise recording of reality (which the camera generally does better and faster).
We live, since the 50's, in an electronic culture. It's a one way trip; we're not going back. To call the the methods of the past better is nostalgic, and it ignores the possibility we have today, which is the same artists have at any time and place in history: to do the best we are able with what is available, the techniques and tools of the epoch.
2 points worth considering.....
1. Electronic tools need some more flexibility, we've come along way, but
there is some major things to be done yet.
For example more flexible tempos and better sequencer features for
dealing with it. Live bands vary tempo a great deal, from verse to verse,
chorus etc etc. It really does make the experience more enjoyable and
before you say dance music has to be constant, it's better to dance too as
well when suspense is being built via tempo changes.
(yes I know programs exist to follow real drummers tempo setting, but
there needs to be some helper tools in sequencers too).
2. On the point of resolution.
I'm a bit sick of over-compression.... Dynamics are a good thing!
The ear hears sound volume based on average not peak. When you over-
compress you make the quiets very quiet and the louds very loud. This
means the average drops while the peak raises. Which damages your
ears. People with damaged ears feel discomfort from dynamics, thus
prefer over-compression, as the levels don't change so much, thus
pushing them further into hearing loss.
-Ben
1. Electronic tools need some more flexibility, we've come along way, but
there is some major things to be done yet.
For example more flexible tempos and better sequencer features for
dealing with it. Live bands vary tempo a great deal, from verse to verse,
chorus etc etc. It really does make the experience more enjoyable and
before you say dance music has to be constant, it's better to dance too as
well when suspense is being built via tempo changes.
(yes I know programs exist to follow real drummers tempo setting, but
there needs to be some helper tools in sequencers too).
2. On the point of resolution.
I'm a bit sick of over-compression.... Dynamics are a good thing!
The ear hears sound volume based on average not peak. When you over-
compress you make the quiets very quiet and the louds very loud. This
means the average drops while the peak raises. Which damages your
ears. People with damaged ears feel discomfort from dynamics, thus
prefer over-compression, as the levels don't change so much, thus
pushing them further into hearing loss.
-Ben
.-../---/.-..
// C
// C
PC Laptop Acer, XP Home SP2, build in crappy sound card.
Bleeps and Blops!
http://bluemoose.greatnow.com/
Bleeps and Blops!
http://bluemoose.greatnow.com/
I don't think the number of bits are that important.
According to some reseach, the human brain can process about 11 megabits per second. Most of it will be discarded by consciousness. That said, we are sample based but we have the ability to interpolate quit well.
The perception works an basis where diffefences are noticed, change versus constant triggers "events".
But, anyway, when it comes to sound quality, the need for wintage warmers and the like says something about what we like...
I do anyway think that the situation where the music exists means more then the sample rate.
And I think some of the tiredness about electronic music comes from the use of pre fabs and quantization and clichés. Which, again, mirrors the production line - quick results for a paying market.
// C
According to some reseach, the human brain can process about 11 megabits per second. Most of it will be discarded by consciousness. That said, we are sample based but we have the ability to interpolate quit well.
The perception works an basis where diffefences are noticed, change versus constant triggers "events".
But, anyway, when it comes to sound quality, the need for wintage warmers and the like says something about what we like...
I do anyway think that the situation where the music exists means more then the sample rate.
And I think some of the tiredness about electronic music comes from the use of pre fabs and quantization and clichés. Which, again, mirrors the production line - quick results for a paying market.
// C
PC Laptop Acer, XP Home SP2, build in crappy sound card.
Bleeps and Blops!
http://bluemoose.greatnow.com/
Bleeps and Blops!
http://bluemoose.greatnow.com/
-
module
- Posts: 11
- Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 6:22 pm
- Location: Wellington - New Zealand (Aotearoa)
- Contact:
Interesting
yeah there is always and will always be this debate about electronic Vs Real music, there are always greys and shades of greys sourrounding the topic really,
when it comes down to it, music is just a set of frequencies oscillating at different rates..
and i do think that alot of people these days have lost touch with the true essence of being a musician and perfoming with and instrument by using parts of your body, more than just your hand and index finger,
but sound creation and muscial expression has no real limits,
i could make a cool track with a kitchen sink and some pots and pans
and a bit of wood.
thousands of years ago it was a drum or a shaker and people making strange noises with there vocal chords.
3000 thousand or so years later (today) we use machines to create our sonic palate
electronic music gives us the option to create anything we like, and i think that mixed in with "real" music is a great thing.
nothing beats watching a musican perform with a real instrument
& nothing beats watching a live electronic band
so why not put it together?
music is so multi layered, and has so many ways of being created.
so many sides to the same surface...
music is... music... and we as humans have the greatest choice of all,
to choose what we want to listen to....
when it comes down to it, music is just a set of frequencies oscillating at different rates..
and i do think that alot of people these days have lost touch with the true essence of being a musician and perfoming with and instrument by using parts of your body, more than just your hand and index finger,
but sound creation and muscial expression has no real limits,
i could make a cool track with a kitchen sink and some pots and pans
and a bit of wood.
thousands of years ago it was a drum or a shaker and people making strange noises with there vocal chords.
3000 thousand or so years later (today) we use machines to create our sonic palate
electronic music gives us the option to create anything we like, and i think that mixed in with "real" music is a great thing.
nothing beats watching a musican perform with a real instrument
& nothing beats watching a live electronic band
so why not put it together?
music is so multi layered, and has so many ways of being created.
so many sides to the same surface...
music is... music... and we as humans have the greatest choice of all,
to choose what we want to listen to....
PC Laptop Acer, XP Home SP2, build in crappy sound card.
Bleeps and Blops!
http://bluemoose.greatnow.com/
Bleeps and Blops!
http://bluemoose.greatnow.com/
Films: The Darkling, Iceman (boxing sounds) , The Silencer.
A BBC interview (about live orchestras)
A TV interview with Zappa (the last sample)
// C
A BBC interview (about live orchestras)
A TV interview with Zappa (the last sample)
// C
PC Laptop Acer, XP Home SP2, build in crappy sound card.
Bleeps and Blops!
http://bluemoose.greatnow.com/
Bleeps and Blops!
http://bluemoose.greatnow.com/
conny wrote:
http://bluemoose.greatnow.com/Div/real_record.mp3
Speaking of phony, anyone seen the Orson Welles film F For Fake? Real eye opener...
http://bluemoose.greatnow.com/Div/real_record.mp3
Speaking of phony, anyone seen the Orson Welles film F For Fake? Real eye opener...