Ableton Forum

Making computer music is easier than ever. It's getting easier, thanks to various software programs like Ableton Live and http://www.ableton.com/schwarzonator. I am definitely a hobbyist, but I enjoy the challenge and the never-ending learning curve. Though, I can't help thinking that much of what I learn today will be irrelevant tomorrow as a software program will do it for me (if I choose to use it). What do others think of this... and does it matter?

I believe that a beautiful melody can only come from human experience. but maybe your right..

computers cannot generate ideas.

feed them with all rules of say minimal techno, and they will create an endless stream of minimal techno.
they might even generate something in between that sound like a tiny little bit of say dubstep. however, they will not feel it and if no human is there to grab this specific moment and is throwing everything else away, willing to take a different route, that little excursion in a possible future will just be random noise, a useless mutation.

don't worry.

Remind me to kill myself if musicians become obsolete

without a computer most of you guys would never be able to attempt to make music to begin with. let alone call yourselves musicians. electronic music suffers from this the most and it's leaking into other genres, especially hip hop beats.

on the flip side there's always the ones doing interesting things but they get drowned out.

it's just better tools, some use them as a crutch, some use them to elevate.

henke wrote:computers cannot generate ideas.

Sometimes, after listening to a lot of electronic music, I wonder if humans can.

I think the op's question has already come true in some senses.

there have been plenty of threads on this topic, met with much hostility. It seems there is a floating blanket of insecurity around musicians today that don't want to accept the fact that music will one day be so very easy to make (due to exntensive, complex developed algorithms) in which the user will need to do very little to achieve A LOT.

i mean think about the 80s compared to making music on an iPad 2G in garage band let alone all the intricate sh*t that's not that hard to do in Live? You understand what im saying?

so think in another 20-30 years exactly what can be achieved. Don't get me wrong now, im sure there will be creativity to be shared. But don't think for one second that the industry wont be GROSSLY oversaturated with "newcomers" trying to recreate all their favorite hits on their SMARTPHONES...in the future

if brian eno has his way.

Will likely turn itself off.

define "musicians".

perplex wrote:there have been plenty of threads on this topic, met with much hostility. It seems there is a floating blanket of insecurity around musicians today that don't want to accept the fact that music will one day be so very easy to make (due to exntensive, complex developed algorithms) in which the user will need to do very little to achieve A LOT.

i mean think about the 80s compared to making music on an iPad 2G in garage band let alone all the intricate sh*t that's not that hard to do in Live? You understand what im saying?

so think in another 20-30 years exactly what can be achieved. Don't get me wrong now, im sure there will be creativity to be shared. But don't think for one second that the industry wont be GROSSLY oversaturated with "newcomers" trying to recreate all their favorite hits on their SMARTPHONES...in the future

You put it rather better than me. For the listener the consequences aren't so bad. More music out there to consume. True much of it may be bad, or the same, but technology will exist to help people find the "good" stuff (according to the criteria of their chosen social network, I imagine).I guess the question the concerned electronic musician need him or her self is "If what I am learning now will be done my a computer in X years time, do I mind?" or, "Why am I learning this now?" I am learning what I am now because I want to be challenged. It does concern me that one day what I have learned may be as relevant to music as carpentry is to cupboard production in the age of IKEA, because I don't want to waste effort. I want my effort to amass, like an artist's.

H20nly wrote:define "musicians".

And that's my point.

i think technology has historically inspired new ideas.

It is going to be hard for a vst to be as dynamic as a musician can be. For instance, I've yet to find a vst (but have not looked hard) that can come close to being able to sound like a real percussionist (If you can make sounds like hidalgo playing on matt smith congas please let me know the name of it!).

Granted there are some good drum kit stuff out there but still does not come close to the soul of good jazz or funk. Granted they might be just fine for crappy dance music, boring stale hip/hop, but great music needs the ideas and sounds that can only come from experimentation of a life time spent with instruments.

But to answer you question yes, for bad TWEEN MUSIC (and yes I thought of ableton role in the evolution of music and mr henke comment on his page about the live ability to easily make crappy music the entire time I watched the south park episode) yes computer will take over the role (and has) in those genres.

The problem is that so many kids are buying (ok downloading ) programs like ableton and not learning an instrument. Live, reason etc can complement a good musician, but if all you know is ableton I truly feel for ya and just know that your missing a big piece. Not understand rhythm and music theory hold you back a great deal..

Ok I'm going off in the wrong direction. Death to the machines!!!. Long live guys like lenny white

That's a bit like saying the power-drill will make Architects obsolete.