Jump to content

Reflections and Philosophy


Recommended Posts

  • Members

For the second time in my life, and for the first in the life of my little brother, we watched

, which charts the path of the earliest form of electronic and synth-pop acts such as The Normal and The Human League, and traces its growth into the end of the 1980s.

 

Before that, I had watched

, which outlines the development of the earliest synthesizers in the 1940s and beyond, and the technologies being developed, as well as the disdain by the musical world for "not being music".

 

Now, history aside, I want you to think about something: where must we, as synthesizer players, performers, developers, and devotees go from our current standing? It's true that the synthesizer has penetrated its way into every form of popular music today. Our pop music is nearly all synthesized, even down to the vocal performances, at times. When the synthesizer was new, it was a fight for acceptance. When it began to gain popularity, it was a time to experiment with it in everything from hair metal to pop, even coming from punk roots.

 

I feel like it is our duty to once again explore the full functionality of the synth. And I don't just mean dig into that dark place of the menu you've never been and see what stuff does. There has to be something new out there, and we must explore it. I wish that I could offer insight into what that might be, but I can't seem to, even in my recent thoughts on the matter, which is why I come here. Do you agree? Should we adamantly be searching to find the new place of the synthesizer in the world? Where might that place be? Is it time for an entirely new breed of musical device to emerge and once again wiggle its way into our common musical landscape?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

i think the future is in professional touch products. i've been following axiotron for a few years and they're being reborn as modbook inc. if they make a semi-affordable macbook pro with multi-touch i'm gonna start saving up now.

 

http://www.modbook.com/

 

you can also buy more affordable dells with music os installed from open labs or you can buy the software for $300.

 

dell inspiron touch 'desktop' all-in-one (at $1200): http://www.dell.com/us/p/inspiron-one-2320/pd

 

dell touch laptops (at $1400 and $1800): https://www.openlabs.com/store/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=20

 

[video=youtube;7LLHLkcFmRo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LLHLkcFmRo&list=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D7LLHLkcFmRo&list=UU0kz2bS_2xvtoEdXH-OUoKw&index=0&feature=plcp

 

i think it will be super powerful combined with tools like ableton live and max or for me personally logic and reaktor, drawing connections between modules, etc.

 

the obvious choice of an ipad is nice for middle aged women like my mom, in fact she loves the ipad we got her. but a more professional version is required imho.

 

[video=youtube;jdGiQE_GToI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdGiQE_GToI&feature=relmfu

 

when it comes to new genres and styles imho they're always formless in the beginning. by going deep into sound design and making new strange sounds you can stay way ahead of the curve.

 

there are many ways to do so. my strength has always been in digital and plug-ins since the mid 90s when i got my start but i think the analog resurgence and modulars in particular are perfectly suited for this.

 

in early 2001 i was doing just that and combining drum and bass with rap. NONE of the mcs i was working with wanted anything to do with it lol and now half of them are into dubstep :facepalm:

 

so its never really rewarding unless your timing is perfect. we always joke about my dad being simultaneously 2000 years behind and 2000 years ahead of everyone.

 

he's been an experimenter his whole life and his projects don't pay unless he nails the timing perfectly, which is much harder to do than make new stuff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Do you agree? Should we adamantly be searching to find the new place of the synthesizer in the world? Where might that place be? Is it time for an entirely new breed of musical device to emerge and once again wiggle its way into our common musical landscape?

 

I agree that we should search for a new place for a synthesizer in music. I've been hugely disappointed by the scarcity or even lack of synthesizer recitals and changing this has become my dream.

 

Technology developments are not important at this stage. They can introduce mind controlled oscillators with quantum waveforms affected by bipolar crystal vibration modulators next year but it still means nothing because people will demand a VST editor for that in order to make dubstep. :evil:

 

I'm in opposition to DAW-ism, MIDI editing and other off-line production techniques inherent in electronic music. For this reason, I'm going to pick up an acoustic instrument this year. But since I've been playing synths for many years, I will keep one monophonic synth and try to fill this, what I think it is, glaring gap in the potential application of the synthesizer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Gliesegarden, I like what you're saying. I agree on the technology advancement part of things. I feel like we don't need knew technology, but new adaptations of what we currently have. Just as an example, the 50s saw the electric guitar come out from the back of the jazz ensemble and come right up front and center, and rock n' roll was born. In essence, that's the dream I'm seeking. That new something that is just totally unique.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Great idea for a thread...

 

 

There has to be something new out there, and we must explore it.

 

 

I personally think electro-mechanical relationships haven't been pushed as far as they might go. We have the electric guitar and the Rhodes-type keyboards, as well as a variety of other things. But integrated synthesis and acoustically or mechanically generated sounds could go in all sorts of directions. I imagine the obstacles here are economic rather than anything else. But for people who like holding and playing instruments, this could be a frontier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

But for people who like holding and playing instruments, this could be a frontier.

 

Interesting. So instead of just new forms of synthesizers, perhaps a sax with an EWI built in, where you can play the synth part, the sax part, or both? Or even further, things like the Moog Guitar with add to the initial abilities of the instrument (infinite sustain, etc.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I've been hugely disappointed by the scarcity or even lack of
synthesizer recitals
and changing this has become my dream.

 

There isn't much of a demand for this, at least not in the US. That's unfortunate because much of the music we hear, whether in pop music, commercials, or movie soundtracks is performed with synthesizers. It's mostly behind the scenes though. People do see synths and workstations at concerts, whether live or on TV, but have little or no knowledge of what they really are and how they work.

 

The general public looks at anything with keys as just a piano or organ... how sad.

 

:idk:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

For the second time in my life, and for the first in the life of my little brother, we watched
, which charts the path of the earliest form of electronic and synth-pop acts such as The Normal and The Human League, and traces its growth into the end of the 1980s.


Before that, I had watched
, which outlines the development of the earliest synthesizers in the 1940s and beyond, and the technologies being developed, as well as the disdain by the musical world for "not being music".


Now, history aside, I want you to think about something: where must we, as synthesizer players, performers, developers, and devotees go from our current standing? It's true that the synthesizer has penetrated its way into every form of popular music today. Our pop music is nearly all synthesized, even down to the vocal performances, at times. When the synthesizer was new, it was a fight for acceptance. When it began to gain popularity, it was a time to experiment with it in everything from hair metal to pop, even coming from punk roots.


I feel like it is our duty to once again explore the full functionality of the synth. And I don't just mean dig into that dark place of the menu you've never been and see what stuff does. There has to be something new out there, and we must explore it. I wish that I could offer insight into what that might be, but I can't seem to, even in my recent thoughts on the matter, which is why I come here. Do you agree? Should we adamantly be searching to find the new place of the synthesizer in the world? Where might that place be? Is it time for an entirely new breed of musical device to emerge and once again wiggle its way into our common musical landscape?

 

 

the problem with all of this is that you speak of 'our', yet overall philosophical/musical opinions are so disparate as to make all of this pretty meaningless. The discussion will go nowhere, in that people who already agree will continue, unscathed.

 

Just make the music you want. There's great gear around, whether you're using software, hardware, digital, analog, modular, or whatever. Some of the best stuff is gear that deviates from the more 'commercial' stuff, and lets you create sounds without all of the same preconceptions. Check out ciat-lonbarde for instance.

 

there's tons of new music around. One problem is that the people who clamor for it generally hate it if it is not close to what they usually listen to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

there's tons of new music around. One problem is that the people who clamor for it generally hate it if it is not close to what they usually listen to.

 

 

If you want to break any ground with music, one of the most important things to learn is that you must occasionally listen to music you don't think you'll like, especially when it's stuff which other people seem to enjoy inspite of your own personal aversion. It's hard to do this because it means putting aside some pride.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Thank you Droolmaster and Praxisaxis. I am with you guys.

 

I often find myself dissenting from the overly-homogeneous group of people that gathers around my usual lunch table at work. I will often say that I respectfully disagree with the overwhelming opinion, even if it is against a particular genre for which I have no love. I then get expectant looks waiting for an argument. At that point I say that I realize the group is waiting for a rational argument but that I am merely disagree and think it is pointless to go any further (because it is).

 

It disappoints me when people that I respect for multiple other reasons are not willing to take a step outside of themselves and listen - to music, to an opinion, or to an idea.

 

As for me personally, I am exploring the idea of the patch as the music and/or performance on a modular. This is not a new idea, but it is new to me. I have normally thought of the patch as a tool to fit into a larger piece or as combined with other patches an recorded to make a composition, but now it is just one patch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I personally think electro-mechanical relationships haven't been pushed as far as they might go. We have the electric guitar and the Rhodes-type keyboards, as well as a variety of other things. But integrated synthesis and acoustically or mechanically generated sounds could go in all sorts of directions. I imagine the obstacles here are economic rather than anything else. But for people who like holding and playing instruments, this could be a frontier.

 

 

I feel that electronic synthesizers, in general, have taken two steps backwards when it comes to expressive controllers (except in little corner pockets here and there, I know about the AS French Connection and the Continuum and others). 90% of the synth world is designed for DAW and dance and is rather static. Even *piano* style controllers have seemed to step back into cheap plastic-y devices that are hard to be expressive on. So there's that opportunity. Electro-mechanical would also be interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

No there doesn't.


And no we mustn't.


It's fine to reach for new sounds. But it is not necessary.


If you want to really change things, change the harmony and proportion.

Attack Pythagoras - not Mozart, not Bach.


But other composers have tried that. It is much easier for weenies to try to create new sounds and not escape the harmonic structure of two-thousand years.

It's much easier to create new sounds.


That's why I'm a Romplerista. I don't need new sounds. I'm still learning what soundsBach, Hayden, Mozart and Beetoven gave us. Yes, I love a sine wave. But ultimately, I'm working within the framework that was given to me. I have no desire to change it.


After I'm finished with that framework, maybe I'll start fishing around for new sounds.

 

 

What exactly is a 'new sound', btw? Music doesn't need harmonic structure. It is only much easier to create "new sounds" if you don't understand them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

@Mikelpanky: Damned good thread topic.

 

 

I agree that we should search for a new place for a synthesizer in music. I've been hugely disappointed by the scarcity or even lack of
synthesizer recitals
and changing this has become my dream.

 

 

Go bother your local coffee/bookshop owner or your local community center. Be prepared to play to a few empty rooms and get a lot of strange looks. If you can do that, you may find yourself in the midst of some likeminded people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

...

Go bother your local coffee/bookshop owner or your local community center. Be prepared to play to a few empty rooms and get a lot of strange looks. If you can do that, you may find yourself in the midst of some likeminded people.

 

 

If you don't get lots of strange looks, you're really not doing anything new.

 

These are really fundamentally 2 different things - making music for money, to be popular, to be famous, using rompler drums, and harmonies, etc - and exploring where sound can take you, using some of the musical concepts that became established in the 20th century, and are still unknown to most people (and hence regarded as strange, or even non-musical). I think that the ot was starting to articulate this, and the use of synthesis within such a framework. What annoys me no end is people who ridicule people who embrace this overall aesthetic because they are not popular.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

If you don't get lots of strange looks, you're really not doing anything new.


 

 

A good observation. As for me: New. Old. It don't matter. I always get strange looks.

 

As for the OP's question/challenge: What can we do?

 

Punt.

 

Be open minded to the unintended consequences of new technology. Play with your toys in odd ways and don't be mean when other people play with their toys funny. Support manufacturers who make quality instruments and musicians in general. Don't be a fuddy duddy but also don't worry that someone wants to play Bach better, either. Bach is good. Don't agonize over the death of music as we know it, you'll sound like your grandpa. And remember: somewhere tonight a 13 year old boy or girl is trying to make dubstep on an iPad. That kid's going to grow up and make musical history one day.

 

I'm going home to make an inspirational poster with cats and unicorns. Good night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The only duty I have, is to finish my work on earth, before time and age expire and retire me. The only obligation I have {aside from several banking institutions}, is to evolve, grow, understand and accelerate my relationship to the universe at large and every single living organism within it. That being said, the future is in effeceincy: 64 bit 192khz 256 note polyphony hyper-realistic surround sound generation, recreation and divination.

When fully realized beings can consistently capture, codify & retransmit the sounds of the celestial elements into humanly understandable terms in realtime, music will have succeeded in it's true purpose:

To illustrate, amplify and inevitably define the infinite power of light/love/life.

 

All other postulations are inherently the result of marketing, economics and commercialization.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Execution is always the duty of the conceptor.

 

That being said, sorry to grate your cheese with my fire-starting phrases. Go have fun, that truly is the most important aspect. But to me, the discovery of the new and unusual is fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Thank you Droolmaster and Praxisaxis. I am with you guys.


I often find myself dissenting from the overly-homogeneous group of people that gathers around my usual lunch table at work. I will often say that I respectfully disagree with the overwhelming opinion, even if it is against a particular genre for which I have no love. I then get expectant looks waiting for an argument. At that point I say that I realize the group is waiting for a rational argument but that I am merely disagree and think it is pointless to go any further (because it is).


It disappoints me when people that I respect for multiple other reasons are not willing to take a step outside of themselves and listen - to music, to an opinion, or to an idea.


As for me personally, I am exploring the idea of the patch as the music and/or performance on a modular. This is not a new idea, but it is new to me. I have normally thought of the patch as a tool to fit into a larger piece or as combined with other patches an recorded to make a composition, but now it is just one patch.

 

 

 

This is why (myself included) that i think certain types of people seek solitude. How can you develop your inner voice and vision when most people are content to sit down and compartmentalize themselves into cultures and lifestyles?

 

the expectation of a rebuttal from you is proof that people merely enjoy the accolades and comradeship that come with group membership. and i agree, constant discussion is pointless.

 

stop making excuses, accept no limits and work as hard as you can.

 

that's how i want to live my life. not sitting down, taking an instagram and spending more time talking about how great it was. I normally feel a drift as my coworkers talk about movies and all sort of music I don't listen to. mainly because 99% of is pop, churned out hollywood stuff and no i'm not pulling a "too mainstream" thing, but really, if you're just doing what everyone else is doing, you're missing life. there's more to life than the inside of bars, the same movie (or music) repackaged and resold. turn it off. give your mind a chance to think for once.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

and since were on philosophy.... can i rant?

 

why do you call yourself creative and open minded when you have to have a look? a certain hairstyle? drive a certain car or listen to a certain kind of music? how can you be open minded when you sit in the same bar with the people night after night? or only watch movies from the same director? listen to music from the same bands?

 

more importantly, how come you reject someone that is all that you claim to be, but actually does it? why do you reject things that are the expressions of someones inner mind while instead you only support the same cliches and memes?

 

why? look at my face and tell me why i'm not as good as you simply because I refused to accepted a uniform, from off the clothes rack and wrap it up in lies. Life comes in all sizes and all sorts of faces and experiences.

 

so please, tell me why you can't live live the way you claim to?

 

and really, i don't care why i'm not good enough for you, the problem to me is that you're simply not good enough for me.

 

I live my life the way I want to and because {censored} you, that's why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

It is much easier for weenies to try to create new sounds and never attempt to escape the harmonic structure of two-thousand years.

 

 

What's funny is that music can be compared to the concept of the Eternal Return. Sound begins as being atonal, we give it structure and melody, then later on we fight against those structures under the notion that it needs to evolve when in fact removing the structure is like returning it to the beginning atonal state.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

interesting read, this thread. i have enjoyed it. the philosophy behind the sounds i create is something i think about constantly, i'm always trying to explore my chosen aesthetic and push myself into uncomfortable territory. i think it's important to _do_ things for yourself with music, to step out of that comfort zone yourself, rather than reading or listening about alternative methods & techniques alone. those who know me know that i like to use the phrase come on, it's two thousand f***ing twelve for f***s sake quite a bit. it's a reference mainly to where we thought we'd be at this point, culturally and technologically and musically - but more than that it's sort of a mantra to get the 'ole brain throbbing and pushing in a new direction.

 

my own personal aesthetic dictates the kind of music i make, but i think the processes and mindset that i have is very much a reactionary thing towards the traditional audio status quo. i had a very traditional and thorough audio education both through experience and Columbia in chicago. i think it's really important to be grounded in those fundamentals and well versed throughout the traditional studio, especially if you're going to be questioning the methods that produce the 'best' result. right now i'm talking specifically about recording, gain staging and processing techniques - but the same can be extended to synthesis. it's good to know how to make the simple, traditional sounds before walking amongst the triple enveloped digital modem-farts.

 

 

blahblahblah. all that said, this 'question everything' mentality about music has really seeped into every aspect of my hobby. pop song structure? why? who decided that? is verse/chorus/verse/chorus/bridge/chorus/chorus truly the best way to release dopamine in the listener's brain in 2012? should that even be the GOAL anymore? why does the average listener perceive certain timbres as 'unpleasant' (adrenaline release) while others are perceived as 'musical' (dopamine release)? why hasn't that changed? that is what this whole music thing boils down to, after all.

 

in asking these questions i've learned a lot. i stopped caring about the latest & greatest pro audio gear a long time ago, and now look at musical instruments not based on feature set but their utility to me personally, and the pleasure i derive from interacting with them. i harbor no delusions of grandeur, and that in itself is sort of liberating. i have no one to please but myself. i think that's a mindset that will allow me to create beautiful art that i love. screw everyone else.

 

 

most of us are in the same boat, hobbyist with no one to please but ourselves. i think the first step towards progress is accepting that simple fact - that the landscape of music in 2012 is a barren wasteland of opportunity, populated by a huge crowd of musicians desperately trying to yell louder than the guy next door. there will be no knight in shining armor to save us with a record deal in 2012, but it's taken a while for that to sink in across the board.

 

i could rant on and on, but for me personally the way forward lies in challenging the accepted musical norms. whether that be something as simple as embracing the background noise in a live instrument recording as an important component of sonic personality instead of rejecting it as an 'impurity', or eschewing the western scales altogether - these are all personal steps forward for me. i treasure each breakthrough i make in my little noise-room.

 

 

i think the one consistency across all of my experiments with sound is that i have goals. a friend & fellow forumite turned me on to this simple but brilliant phrase. i personally am happiest when i accomplish, and i have certain standards for accomplishment. when those standards are met, every single dollar i've ever spent on music gear is worth it - even if no one else ever hears the music.

 

i want to make clear that i in no way regard myself as musically superior in any way because of this mindset. i think that i'm a unique person, and by extension the music i create is unique - but there are many others out there questioning this status quo just like myself in their own way. mr droolmaster is a great example of this, and i have lasting respect for him because he's not afraid to question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

i personally am happiest when i accomplish, and i have certain standards for accomplishment. when those standards are met, every single dollar i've ever spent on music gear is worth it - even if no one else ever hears the music.

 

 

I think that's what separates us from everyone else. We have a high standard that we set for ourselves, even if no one is watching. I have goals too and if I'm the only one that knows I met them, then so be it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

When I look back at what I have achieved in music, it's a lot more than I ever expected. Most of that was through the help of some people who saw something in me and gave me all the rope I needed to hang myself :thu:

 

I can easily point out a half dozen people who were the gateway I needed and I'll be forever grateful to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...