Now this is something that happens to me quite often. Have you ever been in the situation where someone asked “What are you using to create your music?”. Probably since most people aren't familiar with the technology nowadays, at least where I live. I cannot recall how many scornful looks I've received for stating that I take my Horns and Violins from an orchestra library. Most people don't even want to take a look at it because it seems totally ridicolous to them. I don't know if it's pure ignorance or the technology that most people aren't aware of. I guess it's a mix of both since people are trying to avoid it.
I highly respect the real orchestra and I would always prefer it if I had the choice, but samples became really important because they give people with lower budgets the chance to listen to their compositions. Yeah I know, that's nothing new to everyone who reads this. However, I wish more people would acknowledge that.
So how's it where you live? Well I can imagine that sample libraries are much better known and understood in states like LA, the situation in my country (Germany by the way) is stated above.
Any similar situations so far?
Views: 0
You need to be a member of Composers' Forum to add comments!
Chris Alpiar > BiochipsDecember 29, 2008 at 10:32pm
I may be incorrect, but I think that the sentiment against technology is more about the fact that those of us who have spent a lifetime of learning and growth within the musical language are being uprooted and replaced with people who have barely spent 4 or 5 years involved in music, people who havent paid the dues we have. I don't think that there is any argument with weight that anyone can be creative and intuitive with their art in any medium, even though the world of samples and loops opens the door wide to all kinds of expression from people who are not creative.
But rather the feeling that I spent 25 years completely focused on the art of music in one form or another - and I mean dedicated - 10 hour practice regiments with 6 hours of gigs after for many years, the same equivalent toward composing in another era. And then along comes some technology that allows anyone who can click a mouse to create something that is sonically brilliant. This sonic brilliance may or may not have musical qualities but it sounds amazing, and that is enough to fool most directors and producers in a world where the money has all but vaporized from illegal downloading run rampant for 14 years - the directors and producers no longer care about anything other than lowering their bottom line enough to make the same profit they did in the 90s. So as long as there is technology that sounds convincing they are and will continue to be fine with it.
Meanwhile the artists among us, who have dedicated our lives to the craft, who hold in highest illumination the masters of the craft (whether its John Williams or Stravinsky or Duke Ellington or Bach), we suffer like holocaust victims being forced in the proverbial gas chambers of the modern music business.
In order to stay alive in this new world we must pull off the stars sewn on our chests and renounce our ways and become experts in mixing and sequencing and mastering, not to mention marketing and business. And this is such a sellout point to those of us interested in the 'music' and not the 'production' - a very viable thought for even as little as 15 years ago.
So when someone comes along and feels they deserve the respect of this community, that is where the blade is felt most deeply. I am not saying that your music is without merit, or that it holds any lesser value necessarily, but you need to see the big picture and what it is that we are losing today as a result of these lovely software programs
On the subject of Production skills vs musical merit, I get the impression that production is now the main factor. To draw on a literary analogy, it's like people rating a Mills and Boons script produced on a laser-printed wordprocessor above a Charles Dickens novel made on a typewriter.
I feel this even on these forums (and especially the East West), that people judge the mix above the intrinsic musical merit.
Maybe people are being realistic, though, in pointing out that in today's climate a good mix is as important as a good melody, so we shouldn't take offence when our production skills are brought into question.
Would Beethoven have been a failure in the 21st century if he couldn't assign his midi to viable VSTs ?
I think there are many things going on here, some is finale/sibelius scores being played v. played live, sequenced music using orchestral samples vs. live, and loop based composition (like drag and drop fruity loops, garage band, what the apple filmscore one?) vs. 'real' compositions in either of the 2 prior scenarios and also vs. live
I think use of loops to create your music is lame and it is using the talent of whoever actually 'wrote' that loop to create the music instead of your intuitive and knowledgable musicality. And the concept of loops uised in composition opens the door fully for any person that can use a computer to click, drag and drop someone elses works and compile it as their own music. And since the sonic quality is generally good it means that artistic masters of composition have to compete with that kind of stuff when most suits dont care about the difference of a twinkie v. a tiramissou (spelling?) as long as they are both sweet
its such a complex problem and the implications and effects are just as complex
Quite right, maybe I should have used a better analogy - like kids not wanting to watch Citizen Kane, not because it's boring, but because it's in black and white and not in 5.1 surround sound.
People have an expectation of perfection in recorded sound, and anything less comes across as being inadequate or inferior from the very first note - regardless of what musical merit may exist therein. We've both learnt that here, and embarked on a very steep learning curve.
I think even in 200 years there will be classical educated and good composers like you are. Every producer looks for the right man/woman to do the job. Fact is there is highly successful purely computer-generated music that sells like Ambient and there are awesome live orchestra scores that sell.
Replies
But rather the feeling that I spent 25 years completely focused on the art of music in one form or another - and I mean dedicated - 10 hour practice regiments with 6 hours of gigs after for many years, the same equivalent toward composing in another era. And then along comes some technology that allows anyone who can click a mouse to create something that is sonically brilliant. This sonic brilliance may or may not have musical qualities but it sounds amazing, and that is enough to fool most directors and producers in a world where the money has all but vaporized from illegal downloading run rampant for 14 years - the directors and producers no longer care about anything other than lowering their bottom line enough to make the same profit they did in the 90s. So as long as there is technology that sounds convincing they are and will continue to be fine with it.
Meanwhile the artists among us, who have dedicated our lives to the craft, who hold in highest illumination the masters of the craft (whether its John Williams or Stravinsky or Duke Ellington or Bach), we suffer like holocaust victims being forced in the proverbial gas chambers of the modern music business.
In order to stay alive in this new world we must pull off the stars sewn on our chests and renounce our ways and become experts in mixing and sequencing and mastering, not to mention marketing and business. And this is such a sellout point to those of us interested in the 'music' and not the 'production' - a very viable thought for even as little as 15 years ago.
So when someone comes along and feels they deserve the respect of this community, that is where the blade is felt most deeply. I am not saying that your music is without merit, or that it holds any lesser value necessarily, but you need to see the big picture and what it is that we are losing today as a result of these lovely software programs
I feel this even on these forums (and especially the East West), that people judge the mix above the intrinsic musical merit.
Maybe people are being realistic, though, in pointing out that in today's climate a good mix is as important as a good melody, so we shouldn't take offence when our production skills are brought into question.
Would Beethoven have been a failure in the 21st century if he couldn't assign his midi to viable VSTs ?
I think use of loops to create your music is lame and it is using the talent of whoever actually 'wrote' that loop to create the music instead of your intuitive and knowledgable musicality. And the concept of loops uised in composition opens the door fully for any person that can use a computer to click, drag and drop someone elses works and compile it as their own music. And since the sonic quality is generally good it means that artistic masters of composition have to compete with that kind of stuff when most suits dont care about the difference of a twinkie v. a tiramissou (spelling?) as long as they are both sweet
its such a complex problem and the implications and effects are just as complex
People have an expectation of perfection in recorded sound, and anything less comes across as being inadequate or inferior from the very first note - regardless of what musical merit may exist therein. We've both learnt that here, and embarked on a very steep learning curve.
-
6
-
7
-
8
-
9
-
10
of 10 Next