Members Anderton Posted June 28, 2006 Members Share Posted June 28, 2006 It's everywhere. Fidelity is not as important as accessibility. Technique doesn't really count for all that much, given how easy it is to "fix" things. This isn't a "oh, music used to be better, wasn't it?" type of thing. What I'm thinking is a possible downward spiral...where a 128kbps MP3 is accepted as the way music is, and technique is considered an anachronism. One solution I see is live music. If people see more music live, they'll "get" what they're missing. My daughter listens to the usual 11-year-old pop music stuff and hated opera. Last night she went to an opera and saw what it's all about. She dug it to the extreme! Will live music help save recorded music? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Lee Flier Posted June 28, 2006 Members Share Posted June 28, 2006 It might, if 1) people would actually still go out to clubs, and 2) live sound men didn't try to make live bands sound like overcompressed MP3's... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted June 28, 2006 Members Share Posted June 28, 2006 I think that there's always going to be a desire to both experience live music AND to play it. And we should support live music, and encourage as many as possible to experience it because, as you pointed out, it does change people's perception of that music to where they "get" the whole thing. Even when audiences go and see an electronica band perform, it changes their perspective. You get the whole experience. Often, it's a melding of electronic and organic instruments, there's people performing, and/or there's the whole sound/vibe/theatrics/videos, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Johnny Storm Posted June 28, 2006 Members Share Posted June 28, 2006 It seems to me that you're asking, "Has the quality of recorded music been devalued?" To that question, I would reply, "YES!" Many listeners seem to be content listening to 128 kbps MP3s, which, in my opinion, are generally sub-standard. Then again, we used to listen to songs dubbed from the radio onto cheap cassette tapes when we were kids! I'm not sure live music has anything to do with it, unfortunately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted June 28, 2006 Author Members Share Posted June 28, 2006 > That's exactly what I mean. The wrong standards are being set. I don't want live music to sound like a CD, either, I want it to sound like live music! I thought it was a big mistake when bands stopped using the studio to capture what they did live, and started thinking of live music as something to reproduce what they did in the studio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted June 28, 2006 Author Members Share Posted June 28, 2006 > Well, in the sense that people don't have a standard of comparison...like hearing a real string quartet instead of a CD of same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Johnny Storm Posted June 28, 2006 Members Share Posted June 28, 2006 Originally posted by Anderton I thought it was a big mistake when bands stopped using the studio to capture what they did live, and started thinking of live music as something to reproduce what they did in the studio. Gee, I don't know about that. What about The Beatles and Pink Floyd? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Lee Flier Posted June 28, 2006 Members Share Posted June 28, 2006 Originally posted by Anderton I thought it was a big mistake when bands stopped using the studio to capture what they did live, and started thinking of live music as something to reproduce what they did in the studio. Yep. Damn those Beatles, it's all their fault. Once they got off into Revolver and Sgt. Pepper and all that, they couldn't even play live anymore cuz there was no way they could do that stuff live. Not that a lot of cool stuff hasn't been done using the "recording studio as an instrument" concept, but I do agree that we sorely need a pendulum swing back the other way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members snaresmacker Posted June 28, 2006 Members Share Posted June 28, 2006 There are two ways to ununciate the word "music." One is the traditional form: MU-zick. The second is this: EN-tur-TAIN-ment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mutineer Posted June 28, 2006 Members Share Posted June 28, 2006 Originally posted by Anderton ... This isn't a "oh, music used to be better, wasn't it?" type of thing. What I'm thinking is a possible downward spiral...where a 128kbps MP3 is accepted as the way music is, and technique is considered an anachronism... MP3 culture is only temporary, isn't it?As download speeds and flash memory capacities increase, compressed formats should eventually be dropped(?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members nat whilk II Posted June 28, 2006 Members Share Posted June 28, 2006 I've felt for a long time that music has lost value to the public. There's a bunch of factors from my amatuer social-critic armchair perspective: 1 - anyone who was big into music in the late 60s and 70s has a perspective from an era that won't repeat itself. Music was the big thing in a way that's just not the way it was before or since in recent history. 2 - nowadays it seems to me that making movies is the big draw for a huge amount of available talent that maybe used to think about music for a creative outlet. 3 - "free" music via downloads both cheapened the product at the same time it distributed the product. People value what they pay for, that's for sure. But this issue cuts both ways. I'll just say that, if I had to guess, I'd guess that overall music became more disposable and hence less valuable in perception. 4 - music has moved from center stage to the background. From performances in which people sat and listened to party events in which the music provides the atmosphere. Again, this cuts both ways - musicians want people to move and groove. But in the long run, I think it music is not listened to as much anymore as just felt in the background. 5 - the music industry done gone and been real stupid about the goose that lays their golden eggs. They've just about killed the poor thing. Enough said about that....I don't want to hijack the thread into that dookiepile. nat whilk ii Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Robman2 Posted June 28, 2006 Members Share Posted June 28, 2006 CA, I had this general discussion with a dealer last week. The gist was there are cell phones in the EU takimng advantage of 96k. Not sure if that's true but the dumbed down will eventually be offered, cell phones like the old Qualcomm's with 800mA output and 24 bit audio, I WOULD PAY MORE for that. The assholes running cell phones down to the three year old crowd, as a market segment are missing a HUGE demographic, and Steve Jobs is an idiot for facilitaing it...he doesn't give a {censored} about audio, really. R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted June 28, 2006 Members Share Posted June 28, 2006 Originally posted by Johnny Storm II'm not sure live music has anything to do with it, unfortunately. Ideally, the experience of live music keeps it in check: "Oh, THIS is what it's like!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Rudolf von Hagenwil Posted June 28, 2006 Members Share Posted June 28, 2006 Originally posted by Anderton This isn't a "oh, music used to be better, wasn't it?" type of thing. Here a big change happen so around 1967 to 1970. In 1968, the big pop bands played in little clubs and touring with one bus, in 1972 they already played in Town Halls and came with at least one trucks. Today they play in stadiums and come with dozens of trucks. This has financial reasons ---> The Concert agencies have to sell tickets. One thing, they don't sound as good as they did in the club, no matter how big the PA magnifies nowadays. Originally posted by Anderton Will live music help save recorded music? PANEM ET CIRCENSES PARANOIA VULGARIS ET PEPONARII (--->engl. Bread and Games....) . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted June 28, 2006 Members Share Posted June 28, 2006 Originally posted by Lee Flier Yep. Damn those Beatles, it's all their fault. Once they got off into Revolver and Sgt. Pepper and all that, they couldn't even play live anymore cuz there was no way they could do that stuff live. Not that a lot of cool stuff hasn't been done using the "recording studio as an instrument" concept, but I do agree that we sorely need a pendulum swing back the other way. There's room for using the studio as an instrument and going back to capturing the beauty and energy of a live band in a room. Most would argue that the latter is not happening very much anymore. And I would agree. But I would also say that the former doesn't occur nearly often enough - at least, in an artistic sense. Sure, locking things together, editing, etc. is sort of like using a recording studio as an instrument, I suppose, but I'd love to hear music that's more about really creating something artistic instead of making everything "perfectly edited". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sventvkg Posted June 28, 2006 Members Share Posted June 28, 2006 I think it has become devalued. However I continually hear from people and steadfastly believe that music is of an enormous importance in peoples lives. Maybe some people just take it for granted and or forgot. As an artist, I would love to see all major and indie artists alike put a moritorium on releasing ANYTHING new for a YEAR...Let's see how people react to that! I believe they will quickly remember the value that music has to the human spirit and interest could be renewed. I sincerely think people have just come to take music for granted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members philbo Posted June 29, 2006 Members Share Posted June 29, 2006 Originally posted by Anderton It's everywhere. Fidelity is not as important as accessibility. Technique doesn't really count for all that much, given how easy it is to "fix" things.This isn't a "oh, music used to be better, wasn't it?" type of thing. What I'm thinking is a possible downward spiral...where a 128kbps MP3 is accepted as the way music is, and technique is considered an anachronism.One solution I see is live music. If people see more music live, they'll "get" what they're missing. My daughter listens to the usual 11-year-old pop music stuff and hated opera. Last night she went to an opera and saw what it's all about. She dug it to the extreme!Will live music help save recorded music? Yup, I agree completely. Recorded music is in EVERY margarine commercial, radio ad, everything, everywhere. Too much supply might actually CAUSE demand to lag... I haven't been able to listen to Zep ever since they've been in that Cadillac commercial - - The association makes me want to change the station immediately. The 'person performing live music' paradigm is the only solution.... IMHO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members philbo Posted June 29, 2006 Members Share Posted June 29, 2006 Originally posted by snaresmacker There are two ways to ununciate the word "music." One is the traditional form: MU-zick. The second is this: EN-tur-TAIN-ment. Or Moo Sick, in Wisconsin.... (State motto: Come smell our dairy-air!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members amplayer Posted June 29, 2006 Members Share Posted June 29, 2006 Originally posted by Anderton It's everywhere. Fidelity is not as important as accessibility. Technique doesn't really count for all that much, given how easy it is to "fix" things.This isn't a "oh, music used to be better, wasn't it?" type of thing. What I'm thinking is a possible downward spiral...where a 128kbps MP3 is accepted as the way music is, and technique is considered an anachronism.One solution I see is live music. If people see more music live, they'll "get" what they're missing. My daughter listens to the usual 11-year-old pop music stuff and hated opera. Last night she went to an opera and saw what it's all about. She dug it to the extreme!Will live music help save recorded music? Slightly off topic, but FWIW, I'll take a 128kb mp3 file over the cassette that ruled in the mobile places of the '70s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Lee Flier Posted June 29, 2006 Members Share Posted June 29, 2006 Well, I can be as much of an audio snob as the next person, but I never minded cassettes, and I don't mind MP3's either. Nor did I mind AM radio for that matter. All these things do their job: they get the point across. A well recorded piece of music still sounds better than a badly recorded one even over a cheap AM radio or MP3 player. I don't really think "low quality" is the issue and I'm not sure why people are suddenly making an issue of it now... I never heard this much hue and cry over cassettes or AM... everybody used them, yet everybody also knew they weren't the ultimate in fidelity and that wasn't their purpose. I don't see what's different now in that respect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members amplayer Posted June 29, 2006 Members Share Posted June 29, 2006 Originally posted by Lee Flier Well, I can be as much of an audio snob as the next person, but I never minded cassettes, and I don't mind MP3's either. Nor did I mind AM radio for that matter. All these things do their job: they get the point across. A well recorded piece of music still sounds better than a badly recorded one even over a cheap AM radio or MP3 player. I don't really think "low quality" is the issue and I'm not sure why people are suddenly making an issue of it now... I never heard this much hue and cry over cassettes or AM... everybody used them, yet everybody also knew they weren't the ultimate in fidelity and that wasn't their purpose. I don't see what's different now in that respect. Agreed on all points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Lee Flier Posted June 29, 2006 Members Share Posted June 29, 2006 I think it boils down to that the real loss in fidelity - or failure to get the point across - happens at a much earlier stage in the process than being compressed to MP3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Rudolf von Hagenwil Posted June 29, 2006 Members Share Posted June 29, 2006 Originally posted by Lee Flier I think it boils down to that the real loss in fidelity - or failure to get the point across - happens at a much earlier stage in the process than being compressed to MP3. Possibly as early as prenatal or behind the moon. The word "music" is quasi dead, or at least smells funny and i need a new "word", or maybee even a patented trademark on the new "word". I certainly think about creating a new "word" only i am permitted to use. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gtrmac Posted June 29, 2006 Members Share Posted June 29, 2006 Has music been devalued? I would say surely yes but it would seem that every generation since Beethoven's would say the same thing. Maybe people are not getting a good education in music these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members LiveMusic Posted June 29, 2006 Members Share Posted June 29, 2006 It has not one thing to do with fidelity. The problems are... dwi laws, cd burning, pirating (downloading), and... TV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.