BSharp wrote:
RK - "Where do I want to stop? I'd say just before the technology does away with the human element and the skill and/or talent needed to create music."
EC - The greatest technology we have is DNA and I'd venture to say that its greatest manifestation, at least on this planet, is human intelligence. I believe we'll always have artistic mastery over our technology no matter how fast it accelerates, that is, up to the point where we wipe out our DNA.
Technology has an inexorable life of its own and will always overturn established art and vested interests, including those who practice on their existing instruments (sorry to say). Maybe it's best to ride the crest of the moment and perform with what you have before the next big wave hits.
In whatever way the music becomes transformed by new instruments and machines, I believe there'll always be artists who rise to the occasion and find a way to express themselves and inspire their audiences, challenging each other and surfing the wave with ever broader gestures.
RK - "(Electric guitar and bass) expanded on it and gave us more possibilities, without 'cheating'."
EC - It's human nature to feel cheated if someone comes up with an easier way of accomplishing the same, and even more - a process of automation. Some guitarists might think of two-handed string tapping as "cheating" while others jump on the technique and readily add it to their tool set.
EC - The greatest technology we have is DNA and I'd venture to say that its greatest manifestation, at least on this planet, is human intelligence. I believe we'll always have artistic mastery over our technology no matter how fast it accelerates, that is, up to the point where we wipe out our DNA.
Technology has an inexorable life of its own and will always overturn established art and vested interests, including those who practice on their existing instruments (sorry to say). Maybe it's best to ride the crest of the moment and perform with what you have before the next big wave hits.
In whatever way the music becomes transformed by new instruments and machines, I believe there'll always be artists who rise to the occasion and find a way to express themselves and inspire their audiences, challenging each other and surfing the wave with ever broader gestures.
RK - "(Electric guitar and bass) expanded on it and gave us more possibilities, without 'cheating'."
EC - It's human nature to feel cheated if someone comes up with an easier way of accomplishing the same, and even more - a process of automation. Some guitarists might think of two-handed string tapping as "cheating" while others jump on the technique and readily add it to their tool set.
This thread is rapidly approaching awesomeness! So many good thoughts and ideas. I particularly liked the point above that Emmett made that I bolded:
Quote:
Technology has an inexorable life of its own and will always overturn established art and vested interests, including those who practice on their existing instruments (sorry to say). Maybe it's best to ride the crest of the moment and perform with what you have before the next big wave hits.
In whatever way the music becomes transformed by new instruments and machines, I believe there'll always be artists who rise to the occasion and find a way to express themselves and inspire their audiences, challenging each other and surfing the wave with ever broader gestures.
In whatever way the music becomes transformed by new instruments and machines, I believe there'll always be artists who rise to the occasion and find a way to express themselves and inspire their audiences, challenging each other and surfing the wave with ever broader gestures.
10 times "Yes!" on this! And also to the idea that some of us feel cheated when someone comes along and can do with tech something that took us decades to master. It does suck when that happens, as any studio musician on a niche instrument can tell you, now that they've been replaced by a sampler. The trend for a long time has been away from using "real" musicians, except for only the really big budget stuff like movie soundtracks, and just ask the Simpsons music director of 4000 episodes, Alf Clausen, that just got canned because he prefers full live orchestras, how that is working out for him.
http://tvline.com/2017/08/30/the-simpso ... -composer/
"More power to the people" inevitably means that just any schlub can now make music. Which takes away the specialness and maybe even the "eliteness" of those who went to music school, dedicated their lives to mastery of their instrument(s), and/or who make a living playing or even teaching an instrument. (Of which I am a guilty member of this "elite" group of educated musicians!)
Someone takes a sampler and in 2 minutes, whips out some beats and a "melody" (in that it's a sampled flute line from an obscure disco album), and then raps over it, and then boom, there's a hit. Does it devalue the classically trained musician?
Well, that's certainly apples and oranges. But let's not deny the mastery and craft that a good rapper like Eminem has, that comes from years and hundreds of hours practicing rhymes and writing bad lyrics that slowly got better. Let's not deny the mastery of someone who samples millesoconds of singing at a time, splices it up, and using Melodyne to move the notes around to the taste of the composer, creating entirely new melodies and lines that no earthly human can imitate or produce in the first place.
Dance music is rife with that vocal effect, where you slice and dice and rearrange the notes and the rhythms into completely new ways.
I'd like to think that I can create works that don't require an entire string section to sit down and play for me while I record them. Instead, I use sampled Kontakt banks triggered by MID controllers all the time. Am I putting a string section out of work? Well, there's still string music. Perhaps you should look into using an electric cello and some MIDI stuff, but ask the Pentatonics if cello skills and vocals lessons will pay off in a pop context.
Times change. Industries change. Technology changes. How we make a living changes. How we make music changes. What we think of as music changes. The only constant is change. Adapt or die: same for dinosaurs and same for musicians.
Which segues nicely to Karma's post:
Karma wrote:
When I was a young man, I had an electric and acoustic guitar, a couple of amps, and a few pedals.
Today, in my home studio I have the same plus 3 computers, 3 amp/fx modelers, an elaborate midi keyboard controller, Linnstrument, digital grand piano, 12 string grand stick, Warr TGSS, mandolin, banjo, and dozens of software based synths. I'm currently learning to play a 5 string electric cello. Most importantly, today, I'm 10x the musician I was as a young man.
Technology opens up new worlds for musicians to explore and find inspiration in.
My 2 cents,
Karma
Today, in my home studio I have the same plus 3 computers, 3 amp/fx modelers, an elaborate midi keyboard controller, Linnstrument, digital grand piano, 12 string grand stick, Warr TGSS, mandolin, banjo, and dozens of software based synths. I'm currently learning to play a 5 string electric cello. Most importantly, today, I'm 10x the musician I was as a young man.
Technology opens up new worlds for musicians to explore and find inspiration in.
My 2 cents,
Karma
Karma rocks! And I agree with you! I'm also 10X the musician I was when I was a young man--a young man going to music school to study Digital Sound Synthesis and Composition for Electronic Instruments. This was always on the horizon even in the 80s, as the first samplers and drum machines appeared.
Awesome thread, Stickists!
(Until computers start replacing us in bitching about other computers putting THEM out of work!)
