Composers' Forum

Music Composers Unite!

Should using a DAW with samples be categorised as an art form?

I believe that those who use a DAW very effectively are at the helm of a new art form.

They take a raw product, sound samples, and mould them into something expressive and beautiful, just like a painter creates something great from a palette of primary colours.

Like an artist, the colours in the music are mixed and refined to bring out every nuance of expression, dynamics, velocity, expression, tempo curve, etc etc.

Attention is applied to every single note, just like Yehudi Menuhin invested meaning in every note. In fact DAW users have more parameters to deal with for every note. Menhuin never had to care for panning.

The fact that some of these masters of DAWs have limited traditional skills is only a side issue. How many people in reality can even spot dodgy voice leading, if the end result is, overall, musically convincing?

Their tools are pro tools and cubase and a whole host of sample libraries.

So let us celebrate this new art form.

Views: 484

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I have no problems calling myself an artist. I often create for the sole purpose of creating. And when I create out of necessity, I usually add unnecessary details that "enhance" my creation. I don't care whether anyone else considers it art. I've got no issue with you and me having different points of view on the subject. I'm curious, though... do you not "behold" your own creations?

Raymond Kemp said:

You or anyone else may call someone or even me an artist, but I will never accept it. At no time do I try to create art as for me, art is in the eye or ear of the beholder.

Hi Raymond

 

Noooooo .... The only time I opened my Ableton Live manual was to figure out how to record and playback :-)

DAW is an instrument. So is a piano. One uses the instrument to produce sound in accordance to their intentions; he may want to express himself, get another gig done or perhaps just annoy the neighbours. Whatever the intention, the end product in both cases is sound waves which reach the listener and make him react in one way or another. Now, whether being a pianist or a dawtist (;>) equals being an artist is entirely up to you and your definition of art. Btw most definitions of art suck :)

This one better "take"! Wishing you a speedy, and proper recovery this time...

Raymond Kemp said:

Janet, .............a really dark place? :-)
I need to be rude to prove I'm on the mend from suffering rotablator atherectomy.
And og is as much an artist, or somenody finding artistic expression, even at a basic level, as those who came before him.

So is the best DAW operator, who can make the samples sing, not up there with the other musical greats?

Ok what he creates is not llive, but lets face it, most of our musical experiences have been shaped by recordings.

Great studio albums are also great examples of musical art.

Live albums can sometimes be a let down, as the stage can limit the full potential of what is available in the studio.

"I think that your definition of art is not just art, but "great art , like beethoven, bach, monet, picasso, etc."

I agree. The term "artist" is used loosely to describe all sorts of people who do something extremely well. In this case, I'm inclined to agree that the complexities involved in mastering the production of computer music do deserve to be called art, but in the more limited sense.  And I desperately wish I had those abilities!

But to backtrack a little from the elevated status I have given DAW users, there is the problem that some of them have bypassed traditional learning routes involving harmony and orchestration, etc, or just learned them along the way.

Thererore somebody like Hans Zimmer might be able to create wonderful sounding film soundtracks, acoustically speaking, but there is something missing musically when compared to the greats from the Golden Age of film scores.

He is an artist, but in building a career on samples and computers, there may be some gaps compared to those who learnt it the hard way.

There are a select few who are great at both the production and the old fashioned theory and orchestration, but i dont know many. Even on this forum it is mainly one or the other.
Well the man right at the top of the profession, mr zimmer, has a limited classical or orchestral background.

I might sound a snob, but it shows, compared not to me of course, but to the greats of a previous age, like mancini, elmer bernstein, etc etc.

I know that there are some talented all rounders on vi control forum, but there are quite a few people who are making a career out of film music from a sound design rather than a solid orchestral background.

And what is the "real world", pray tell?

Raymond Kemp said:

The "active" members on this forum are not a representative cross section of music in the real world. In fact, no where near it.

I don't understand your question, Ray. I'm an individual asking how you, a fellow individual, define the "real world". I hear this phrase from time to time, in various contexts, like you just used it. I'm never sure what it means, so I thought I would ask what it means to you in the context you used it.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Sign up info

Read before you sign up to find out what the requirements are!

Store

© 2020   Created by Gav Brown.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service