Punk, (IMO) was a reaction against the Highly trained/skilled artist together with the realisation that Gigs and tours were MASSIVELY expensive and were just NOT making enough money for the SUITS. NOT to forget Vangelis who was NOT formally trained and could not read or write score - (This I know from personal experience).
Musicians themselves also evolved, from fairly fundamental skills, largely self-taught - to the Academy trained icons of the 70s like Wakeman, and Emerson. Often driven by available technology - there were always the experimenters, pushing the boundaries with what the technology would allow. In the wider world, the evolution through the 50s onwards we saw "songs" largely based on 3 chords - then 4 - onwards and upwards through "Symphonic Rock" of the 70s - and then back again to basics (IMO) with the punk era. Two evolving loops, if you will, independant of each other. It does this naturally in the wider world sense - and also in the inner-world of the Musician. It is a fundamental nature of Music - to evolve. It's a different matter if one purposefully misleads others (specifically claims to have engineered something when actually having just recorded a live sound, or specifically claims to perform something live when actually just miming to a preproduced sound, etc), but that's indeed about integrity, telling the truth about something vs. Both extremes can result in equally beautiful and powerful works, and there's so much creative space to cover in between. Personally, I have been deeply moved by both :), on the other hand by virtuosity and expressiveness in a live situation, and on the other, pieces of music that have been engineered during the course of weeks or months, produced completely by editing and resampling and constructing signal chains and modulating parameters. At its core, it's about trying to formulate what is valid or respectable expression in a given field of creativity/art.Īgain in my opinion, there's a massive spectrum of musical expression between the extremes of completely engineered music and completely live music. In my opinion, the "objective observations" are being overshadowed by the bias that shows in every statement like that. Which doesn't really matter much, as nearly no-one wants to listen to it. Unlike in the good old days® the vast majority composing "original" synth stuff are creating music that will never be performed live by others as even they themselves can't perform it live.
Yet you write most everything, when commenting programmed/engineered music, in this tone: I'm making observations, not universal value judgements. I use Ableton, experiment with live looping, mess around with modular synths and automation. I thought I was pretty clear about that."sometimes useful, but also a distraction from the other ingredients"."everyone can judge for themselves"."nor am I instructing on "what's best".Īs I said, I use VSTis etc myself. I'm not putting anything above anything whatsoever. I just have to comment on this "observing" attitude while just lurking about. Being new here, this thread caught my eye.
0 kommentar(er)
