Members coop2001 Posted July 3, 2003 Members Share Posted July 3, 2003 Are musicians and songwriting changing with the times? I'm a sixties survivor who was weaned on blues, and taught that all music, especially blues, was a method of expressing not only a message of words, but of FEELING, to be played for people to share these feelings, whether it be an audience of one person or 10,000. Feelings of sadness, joy, of blues, or just rocking out. Music is further enhanced by chemistry between musicians, such as players in a band. The Beatles, for example. They are a good example of the difference between a musical collaboration, using the chemistry between the players to achieve something greater (at least different) than a solo effort. Paul's songs, on which he writes all and plays all, are good, but, IMO, are not equal to (or at least lack something the Beatles' group efforts provided) , which made them not only great, but able to share feelings with millions`. I am seeing, more and more, young musicians who are playing only in their rooms, recording solo, playing all instruments (usually just a synth, some guitar, and a drum machine) (even playing instruments is falling off as more use samples), and all vocals (harmonizing with oneself) without any input or chemistry from anyone else added in their music. Usually, the music is listened to alone, with headphones, sharing nothing with anyone else. This "musical masturbation", while still art, lacks the inter-human exchange that, I believe is one of the important purposes of music- expression and sharing feeling. While playing music for one's own enjoyment is fine, I feel that something is slipping away, as we become more and more isolated from interpersonal contact, as the computer age advances. Nowadays, the trend is to prefer virtual communication remotely, usually by computer email, instead of voice (telephone), and, especially avoiding interacting with people in person. The trend in music is to sit alone with a computer, and add track after track-alone, to be listened to-alone. Sure, sharing personal feelings, and personal expression with one other, remotely, by a recording, is music, but-I feel we are losing something in our music. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members billsworld Posted July 3, 2003 Members Share Posted July 3, 2003 While in some ways, I understand where you're coming from, I tend to differ from you in that I don't know that anything is truly missing. I, for one, spent more than 20 years playing in bar bands, and in all that time I never felt satisfied musically by the experience...it was a job...a fun job, but a job nonetheless. I much prefer the more intimate act of writing and recording on my own, then sharing the finished product with others for them to (hopefully) enjoy as well. I believe I'm more able to communicate, both in terms of thoughts and feelings, through the act of personal songcraft than I was ever able to do playing "Freebird" for a bunch of drunks who saw the band as nothing more than a glorified jukebox. I'm not saying playing in bands isn't as good or anything like that, but for me this is far more satisfying, because I'm able to more accurately communicate my "vision", for lack of a better way of putting it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Glynard Posted July 3, 2003 Members Share Posted July 3, 2003 Certainly playing "Freebird" to a bunch of drunks would be less satisfying than collaborating with a group of musical equals on an original piece. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members PFB Posted July 4, 2003 Members Share Posted July 4, 2003 1. Stevie Wonder recorded some all-time brilliant stuff, doing everything himself (or a large majority) 2. Freebird is a Great Song. 3. But I agree "chemistry" is most important, after songwriting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Canadian_Guitar_Guy Posted July 4, 2003 Members Share Posted July 4, 2003 I completely agree. I have tried to sit alone and write/record songs, and find that it doesn't work. Yet in the presence of others I always seem to come up with something that they find interesting. I wish I knew someone to collaborate with on musical projects, yet I live in a very small town, and it just isn't likely to happen anytime soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members coop2001 Posted July 4, 2003 Author Members Share Posted July 4, 2003 I have encountered quite a few young players who are just starting out, who believed that blues could be learned in its entirety from the net. The result is usually boredom with playing 3 chords over and over, or remarks about how blues is as simple as playing the pentatonic scale up and down. "I don't see what the big deal is- this is simple! ANYONE can play blues in their sleep". As a matter of fact, I have seen a post on the guitar forum here, where Stevie Ray Vaughan was described as a mediocre player, since all he was playing was blues, which only required playing 3 chords and the blues scale, which "anyone" could play. He was flooded with replies. How about FEEL? Feel , or expression, is really what blues is all about. This cannot be learned by tablature. Sure, the notes and chords can be learned fairly easily, but playing with heart and soul requires much more. I have learned some great things by jamming with other people, which has enlarged my musical world, making me a much better songwriter than I would have been, had I remained solo. Seeing expressions on the faces of players, gritting their teeth, closing their eyes, taking the music elsewhere, also can take you to that place. Seeing the different ways people play things is always a learning experience. Riffs! Different techniques. All advantages of jamming with people. I'm not against the net (hey. I'm on it, right?) But I am seeiing more and limitations of the young who were raised to believe that everything can be attained from the net, makes me believe they are losing something, by remaining isolated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members coop2001 Posted July 4, 2003 Author Members Share Posted July 4, 2003 I have encountered quite a few young players who are just starting out, who believed that blues could be learned in its entirety from the net. The result is usually boredom with playing 3 chords over and over, or remarks about how blues is as simple as playing the pentatonic scale up and down. "I don't see what the big deal is- this is simple! ANYONE can play blues in their sleep". As a matter of fact, I have seen a post on the guitar forum here, where Stevie Ray Vaughan was described as a mediocre player, since all he was playing was blues, which only required playing 3 chords and the blues scale, which "anyone" could play. He was flooded with replies. How about FEEL? Feel , or expression, is really what blues is all about. This cannot be learned by tablature. Sure, the notes and chords can be learned fairly easily, but playing with heart and soul requires much more. Bouncing your music off an audience can tell you a great many things. It can even enhance your playing by using the energy of their listening to boost yours, if you know what I mean. I have learned some great things by jamming with other people, and by playing for audiences. These have enlarged my musical world, making me a much better songwriter than I would have been, had I remained alone. Seeing expressions on the faces of players, gritting their teeth, closing their eyes, taking the music elsewhere, also can take you to that place. Seeing the different ways people play things is always a learning experience. Riffs! Different techniques. Or how about-"Oh no! I thought I was the only one playing that! or I thought I wrote it!", only to find out it's been around for years! All advantages of jamming with people. I'm not against the net (hey. I'm on it, right?) But I am seeiing more and limitations of the young who were raised to believe that everything can be attained from the net, and they can achieve their best music alone, never jamming with anyone else. I believe they are losing something, by remaining isolated. Not to mention the pure fun of it. OK. that's ,it! I didn't mean to write an essay. Just had to put in my 2 cents... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members treblebooster Posted July 5, 2003 Members Share Posted July 5, 2003 Having played in a few bands I think that I agree with you: there is definitely something to be said for communication between musicians. I really hate listening to midi stuff. That constant tempo just becomes stale sounding. Still, though, I get a lot of satisfaction from creating music and writing songs by myself. To me this is the equivalent of sitting down at the word processor and writing a story. When I finish a tune, though, I always wish that I had a live band to play it right and make it groove more. If you'd like you can listen to my masturbatory efforts here: http://www.totallyhumungus.com/ep.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members buzzcut Posted July 8, 2003 Members Share Posted July 8, 2003 I agree with a lot of your points but what I can say for the solo project is that it's a satisfying feeling to know you can complete one on your own - at least I will feel that way when mine is finished. There is nothing quite like playing in a band when all the members are on the same page but it's rare that they all remain on that page. When the egos start coming out and practice time begins to be taken up with petty disagreements, the enjoyment fades fast. Having played in a couple of bands myself, I truly admire any band that can play together and stay together longer than five years - hell two or more is pretty good. The good side to computer music and solo projects is that the only ego you must contend with is your own. Creative differences are instantly resolved by yourself. The beauty of midi is that it makes it possible for songwriters such as myself to create a relatively decent arrangement for songs without having to hire musicians and without having to learn every instrument I wish to include in a song. Sure, it's a bit mechanical but I'm just trying to get an idea across. I'm not expecting my recording to be used on an album. I just want someone else to like it enough to record it properly on their album and send me my share. Alluding to one of your points, I still collaborate with my best friend on a regular basis. But we have a friendship of 25 years and a love and trust for each other and our music. That's not often the case for others. It's a rare event IMO and I consider myself one of the lucky people to have a solid friend who just happens to be someone with whom I collaborate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members palindrome Posted July 17, 2003 Members Share Posted July 17, 2003 the beauty of midi is that it makes it possible for songwriters such as myself to create a relatively decent arrangement for songs without having to hire musicians and without having to learn every instrument I wish to include in a song. I agree with you there. It's saves you money, and, for example, I can do stuff with a guitar patch on a keyboard that I could never do with a real guitar (I suck at it, plus I'm left handed and lefty guitars are expensive). Of course, everything's bugging the hell out of you, because those sounds still aren't REAL instruments, no matter how good they may sound. At the end of it, I still wish I could have a real band to play my stuff, there's so much more expressiveness and synergy between the players that's lost in samples, IMO. But guys in their homes with their gear and their computer (like me:D) aren't the real threat, it's got to be those loop music "artists" who somehow think that laying out prerecorded riffs on their computer constitutes talent. Give me a friggin' break. If there's no musicianship involved, then you're not a musician. End of story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members scooby43 Posted July 17, 2003 Members Share Posted July 17, 2003 I'm new to this online music scene and may be a little green, but I figured I'd weigh in with my two cents... In regards to this issue, I think you gotta take the good with the bad. Granted there's a lot of crap, but there's also a lot of great "electronic" music being made right now... people are taking advantage of this sonic pallate and inventing sounds that couldn't be created without a computer. I'd even go so far to say that the only trully original music that has come out in the past decade or so is a product of this new technology in some way... Hip hop, rap, electronica, etc... The technology has also levelled the playing field... making it possible for anyone with a mac and some software to record an album. But as the gentleman who started this thread pointed out, the musicianship is definately suffering. I couildn't agree more... But who's to say that the new technology = the death of musical collaboration. In fact, in some cases, it's facilitated it. I live in LA and have been working with a friend up in Canada on some pieces. We email tracks back and forth, exchange song ideas, and gradually piece together recordings. In any event... change is good. The truth is that pop music peaked in 1967 with Sgt. Pepper... The Stones are disgraceful dinosaurs... Rock is dead and the sampler is the new electric guitar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BryanMichael Posted July 17, 2003 Members Share Posted July 17, 2003 I was going to write alot more on this subject because the topic was so well posted...but I'll stick to this one thing right now- I really don't understand when you guys talk of MIDI / Computer sounds not being real instruments etc... Have you ever heard of samples? Soundfonts (which are just a sample format) ACID loops? There are SO many ways to make authentic sounding music with MIDI on your computer that it becomes hard to tell what is MIDI, audio loop, or direct performance ("real") Don't go by the plinky sounds generated by your soundcard- that's the instrument, not the MIDI. Go to sonicimplants.com and listen to the drum demos for their soundfonts- MIDI drums! There are also companies that put out things called "Twiddly Bits" which are REAL musicians playing parts on MIDI instruments so that they capture all of the nuances of real drumming, flute playing, etc... and are stored as MIDI files, you can cut these up, change the notes, velocity, duration, key, etc..any parameter becasue it is MIDI data! not an audio file. Then you can create your own parts with "real feel". Manipulating all of that MIDI data can be a pain, but the end result is a much, much more rewarding and "real" sounding recording. ACID is a great tool as well- pick up n ACID drum sample CD from Mick Fleetwood or any number of other performers and create backing drum tracks with stereo recordings of a real drummer playing real drums. Another trick to add life to MIDI drums is to add a REAL tambourine or shaker on top of the somewhat straight ahead MIDI timing you often get with some of the more simple drum generators. Seriously, look at sonicimplants.com one good drum soundfont can transform your entire project. B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members billsworld Posted July 17, 2003 Members Share Posted July 17, 2003 Originally posted by palindrome I agree with you there. It's saves you money, and, for example, I can do stuff with a guitar patch on a keyboard that I could never do with a real guitar. Of course, everything's bugging the hell out of you, because those sounds still aren't REAL instruments, no matter how good they may sound. At the end of it, I still wish I could have a real band to play my stuff, there's so much more expressiveness and synergy between the players that's lost in samples, IMO. But guys in their homes with their gear and their computer (like me:D) aren't the real threat, it's got to be those loop music "artists" who somehow think that laying out prerecorded riffs on their computer constitutes talent. Give me a friggin' break. If there's no musicianship involved, then you're not a musician. End of story. This is the same kind of debate that I've had ongoing with a lot of musicians around town for a long time. The specifics of the discussion are that, at least until they hear it done right, nobody believes, for example, that you can play live with a keyboard bass (other than for like dance stuff, and when do you play that live? ) and have it sound as good as it would with a bass player. For my part, I have to point out that it's not the sound, it's the feel. I'm a bass player/ part time keyboard player in a three piece band, where about a third of our songlist has me playing keys with left hand bass. I often get people who haven't heard us asking how we can possibly play that way, meaning play with key bass and have it not sound like crap, to which my response is always, "wait until you've heard it to pass judgement." I've worked very hard over the years to get things set up sound-wise, and practiced my technique to the point that unless you're watching me do it, it's very hard to tell when I playing keyboard bass as opposed to bass guitar...other than the fact that I play simpler bass lines on keys than I do on bass guitar. I think the same thing can apply to this disscussion. It's not that the sounds aren't good, it's that the person playing the sounds doesn't know how to make the samples behave like the real instruments behave, and that takes a lot of practice, but can be done. I've expressed my belief that recording on your own, as opposed to always playing with a band, can actually be a good thing. But that doesn't mean I totally devalue playing live with a band. some of my fondest memories are of playing with certain people, whom I just clicked with, where everything seemed to gel perfectly. I knew what they were going to do, and they knew what I was going to do before we did it, not because we had rehearsed things to death, but because we knew each other's playing that well. That can be an extrememly rewarding experience, and one that I would never discount as being something that could be replaced completely by playing solely on your own. That being said, I still love recording by myself, both because of the unique challenges it presents, and because I am able to come up with a finished product which represents my personal "vision". So I guess you could say that I understand both points of view here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Greenshoe Posted July 17, 2003 Members Share Posted July 17, 2003 coop2001, While I do agree that collaborating with like-minded musicians is a great thing, I don't see the opposite (that of a one-man band) being a bad or worse thing - it's just different. Collaborating and sharing the process with others has its joys and drawbacks, just like recording alone. While I love playing with good musicians when I get a chance, I'd rather work with MIDI and samples than with bad musicians, flakes and indie-hipster image types. As for the computer recording, without all the pro-sumer equipment available today, I would not have gotten back into making music after having not played a note for 5 years. Unlike a band, I've got the ability to make music that reflects my tastes - I'm not stuck in rock. I'm beginning to experiment with hip-hop and electronica, both which I also grew up listening to in teh 80s. Basically, it's brought back the joy of making music again, and I'm sure I'm not alone in this respect. Of course I'd love to collaborate, but my experience so far in the Bay Area has been that I've found it to be a snooty ubercool community who take themselves too seriously which is great for making music critics, but not musicians - there are Radiohead/Coldplay clones who don't know the difference between being witty and being obnoxious, or jazz uber-snobs who poo-poo anything 'new' or 'simple' as bad. And if you are a DJ or into rap/hip-hop but not black, you must be a real loser and not a real 'artiste'. At least online, I can share or collaborate with others thousands of miles away beyond my city limits which is a great thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members scooby43 Posted July 17, 2003 Members Share Posted July 17, 2003 I like your sound. How do you do the bass parts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Greenshoe Posted July 17, 2003 Members Share Posted July 17, 2003 Originally posted by scooby43 I like your sound. How do you do the bass parts? Not sure if you were responding to me, but it's a yamaha bass (the cheapie guitar center special) thru a bass pod into a digi 001. that's about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members buzzcut Posted July 17, 2003 Members Share Posted July 17, 2003 Originally posted by BryanMichael I was going to write alot more on this subject because the topic was so well posted...but I'll stick to this one thing right now- I really don't understand when you guys talk of MIDI / Computer sounds not being real instruments etc... Have you ever heard of samples? Soundfonts (which are just a sample format) ACID loops? There are SO many ways to make authentic sounding music with MIDI on your computer that it becomes hard to tell what is MIDI, audio loop, or direct performance ("real") Don't go by the plinky sounds generated by your soundcard- that's the instrument, not the MIDI. Go to sonicimplants.com and listen to the drum demos for their soundfonts- MIDI drums! There are also companies that put out things called "Twiddly Bits" which are REAL musicians playing parts on MIDI instruments so that they capture all of the nuances of real drumming, flute playing, etc... and are stored as MIDI files, you can cut these up, change the notes, velocity, duration, key, etc..any parameter becasue it is MIDI data! not an audio file. Then you can create your own parts with "real feel". Manipulating all of that MIDI data can be a pain, but the end result is a much, much more rewarding and "real" sounding recording. ACID is a great tool as well- pick up n ACID drum sample CD from Mick Fleetwood or any number of other performers and create backing drum tracks with stereo recordings of a real drummer playing real drums. Another trick to add life to MIDI drums is to add a REAL tambourine or shaker on top of the somewhat straight ahead MIDI timing you often get with some of the more simple drum generators. Seriously, look at sonicimplants.com one good drum soundfont can transform your entire project. B Bryan, I agree with you on this. In fact, I've recently purchased the GM soundset from Sonic Implants because so many people rave about them and the demos sound wonderful. However, I haven't yet gotten them configured properly for my sblive 5.1 (my win98 won't support the audigy card I want so I'll have to wait until I can afford to upgrade my puter). I've been concentrating on getting my midi files exactly the way I want them first. In the meantime, I've been using a Roland Virtual Sound Canvas (software synth) that does a pretty darned good job for certain sounds. Once I've got all the midis the way I want them, I do want to pursue the soundfont thing further. But I've strayed from the topic slightly... I think the key to adding the human "feel" to midi (without tweaking a bunch of midi settings until you get it just right or having a "real" musician perform the midi parts - not that you shouldn't do this if you can) is something you touched on: Layer your own performance on top of the midi background. This of course, assumes you can play at least one instrument well enough to sound decent on the recording. I think the best part of midi and looping programs is that it allows those of us who are not virtuosos to create music that we hear heads and even some we don't hear in our heads. I play guitar but I'm not what I would consider an accomplished guitarist. I'm pretty good with rhythm but for the number of years I've played, I'm not what I should be. At the same time, my primary focus has always been songwriting, so my emphasis has been there instead of being a "musician." There are very few things that are more satisfying than playing live with a band when all the cylinders are firing at the same time. Unfortunately, that experience has been too rare for me and I just don't want to devote too much of my time and energy to try to find that when I have songs that need to be completed. That's why I love the whole computer/midi thing. It's a god send for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Greenshoe Posted July 17, 2003 Members Share Posted July 17, 2003 hey buzzcut, have you tried Reason? (no, I'm not affiliated in any way with the company, just a user). If you haven't, I think you can download a demo on their website. Isn't a resource drain, easy to use, is very robust/tweakable, and over time as you collect more sample libraries it's quite an amazing piece of software - for drums, string/horn arrangements, sound efx, keyboard comp parts, etc. etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members buzzcut Posted July 17, 2003 Members Share Posted July 17, 2003 Originally posted by Greenshoe hey buzzcut, have you tried Reason? (no, I'm not affiliated in any way with the company, just a user). If you haven't, I think you can download a demo on their website. Isn't a resource drain, easy to use, is very robust/tweakable, and over time as you collect more sample libraries it's quite an amazing piece of software - for drums, string/horn arrangements, sound efx, keyboard comp parts, etc. etc. No, I haven't. I've heard of it but haven't tried it or looked into it. What would you estimate the cost to be to get the program and all the extras I'd need to make it work? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Greenshoe Posted July 17, 2003 Members Share Posted July 17, 2003 buzzcut, i think you can buy version 2 for $200(?) online and get a free upgrade to 2.5...i bought it about 8 months ago for around $300 at a local music shop. the software comes with 3cds - 1 for the software and 2 cds of samples...there's tons of free samples and refills submitted on reasonstation.net....Since it takes .aif and .wav samples and loops, you can use sample CDs you may already have, convert parts of your existing work into samples or loops, and there is a recent free add-on where you can import and convert AKAI format stuff I believe. In short, the $300 for the software is all I've really spent thus far. Most of my sample library is either stuff I recorded myself or gotten for free while surfing the net. In my view, building up a decent original sample library takes more time than money - like collecting stamps or baseball cards. Like Photoshop for audio, you can really do a lot of layering of different samples to create a something original. You may find interesting sound samples here and there while surfing the net - some which may not be 'musical' like newsbytes of speeches, wind sounds, etc. but can be manipulated where it could either make an interesting drum hit or synth pad. You can even do it yourself by recording the source yourself and using Reason to really manipulate the sample (layer with other samples, change the pitch, turn an acoustic sound into something that is cool but totally not like the original sample, etc.) - it's like that TV commercial where two guys record car doors slamming, horns blaring, etc. and then make drum loops out of it - you get the idea. All the stuff I've posted online so far has been really standard rock stuff, and only in the past few weeks have I really started to experiment with using more electronic sounds in my rawk stuff, and it's really fun. I've lost enough sleep doing it! Okay, I'm sounding like a commercial so I'll stop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members buzzcut Posted July 18, 2003 Members Share Posted July 18, 2003 Greenshoe, thanks for the info. I may just have to download the demo and play with it when I have time. My wife just bought me a Taylor acoustic/electric as an early anniversary present so I'll have to sacrifice and do without any new toys for a while. The things we have to suffer through for the love of music... Did I mention how much I love my wife? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rickenvox Posted July 18, 2003 Members Share Posted July 18, 2003 you need to just go out and buy the new Radiohead album Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members palindrome Posted July 27, 2003 Members Share Posted July 27, 2003 All the stuff I've posted online so far has been really standard rock stuff, and only in the past few weeks have I really started to experiment with using more electronic sounds in my rawk stuff, and it's really fun. I've lost enough sleep doing it! Keep it up. The "riff rock" idea has been beaten into the ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.