Great advice for anyone doing/making music.

[mferguson]

And, of course, now you don't even have to learn how to play an instrument or sing, you have Rock Band and Guitar Hero so you can just pretend. But even if you're still too advanced for that, you have Autotune and samples and so forth so you can actually perform without actually having to have any talent.

Somehow I think they will always be a market for people who can actually play an instrument... And btw, it is possible to actually learn to play the drums somewhat from Guitar Hero. The guitar part is absolutely useless of course, but the drums seem to require you to actually hit the right thing at the right time. No technique involved, but I didn't learn that in my first few years of playing drums anyway. Not that I'm a fan of guitar hero, mind you... LOL

You know, there is plenty of variety and quantity and quality music out there still, perhaps more than ever. Including the most inovative of artists. Just don't expect it to get played on large-wattage radio stations or college-town radio. It's gotta be searched out via Internet, public radio, or satellite radio.

The problem is on the Internet, people tend to "silo"; i.e. they tend to seek out and reinforce what they are already familiar with. This is true with everything from political beliefs to social groupings to musical tastes. The problem with public and satellite radio is too many folks don't have access to it, and even if they do, it still takes a bit of effort to find the right programming.

What you're forgetting is that just a few years ago we didn't have these options at all. In the last few years I've been freaking out at the volumes of music I now have access to - mostly for free via the internet. And when I find music that I really like (which happens SO much more often now) I can buy the album, but I no longer get stuck w/ a crappy album I bought because the only song I was able to hear from it was the only good song on the album. MSN music puts a lot of new stuff out there every week, streaming for free. With internet radio, myspace, etc., it got overwhelming quickly, & I've never even gotten to satellite radio. When I was a teen, the music I listened to was literally dictated by what my friends listened to & what was on the radio. These days I'm turning droves of people on to little-known music I found on the internet.

Here's an idea that just popped into my head. Anybody interested in the idea of starting an "alternative to vanilla music programming" (it would need a better name than that ) thread in the Prime Time forum here where folks can meet to share sources (Internet radio stations, lesser-known record labels, specific syndicated radio shows or podcasts, etc.) and/or share specific artists or releases of particular personal interest as not being the same old Clear Channel/college radio pablum?

I would love that!

 

[miroslav]

I listen to quite a lot of music genres, some "sophisticated" some plain-ol-rock-&-roll...and as long as it moves me, it's doing what it is supposed to.

Complexity in music is no guarantee for that, and IMO, there's more to it than just that...than just the degree if theoretical sophistication.
I always like to go back to my Neil Young analogy ...the "this note's for you" thing.
You don't need a lot of notes to make good music. There's also the tona and timbre textures and the rhythmic interactions...and it is often the simple, more primal stuff that tends to hit people in the gut and to the bone, and why so many people connect to the more basic, "3-chord" rock.

But hey...Mozart or Vivaldi has it's moments too!

 

[Terry Wetzel]

I'm getting my 2 cents in late here. I've read a number of responses and they mostly seem convinced that anyone with an inclination to play an instrument should attend Julliard! To me it all depends on where you want to go. What level of achievement you wish to accomplish. It would be downright foolish to say that formal music training is not beneficial. However, most kids who venture in to music nowdays are in to commercial rock and roll which does not require a degree in music theory. That doesn't make it any less a viable music form. After all, it has dominated pop music for the last 50 years so there must be something there! Does anyone reading these comments think for one minute that John Lennon, Paul Mcartney or Elvis Presley had formal music training? No, but they certainly knew what key they were playing in! And that's another thing I find most peculiar! How can anyone not know something as rudimentary as major and minor keys and still call themselves musicians. When I first picked up a guitar I learned by ear and common sense that, if I sung a melody, there were certain chords that fit harmoniously with what I was singing. I was able to hear when the changes occured and was able to logically decide that what ever chord the song started and ended in must be the key! (Duh). Of coarse I'm referring to popular music,(I.E.) Rock and Country. I know that this will evoke outrage by psuedo intellects who think that by subscribing to the classical and jazz forms makes them somehow above the Lester Flatt and Earl Scruggs school but hey, It's all music and the beauty is in the ear and emotions of the listner,(and I might add), In the wallet of the record buying public! Stay Cool!

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

You see that in every industry. You'd be surprised how bad computer programmers are about this

No, I'm not surprised at all, I've been a computer programmer at many levels in many languages ever since the Altair 8800, and I've seen that all over .

And yeah, that kind of thing is true of every vocation. I have worn many job hats in my life, and one truism that I firmly believe in is a version of the 80/20 rule that says that in any given vocation, 80% do only a passable job of it at best (and suck at it at worst) and only 20% are really good at it. This is true of everything from letter carrier to brain surgeon, IMHO. Put simply, most people are in the wrong profession, usually for the wrong reasons.

The optimist in me used to think that it would be different with avocations than it was with vocations,that if one took up a hobby or an art like creating music, that they'd be good at it because it was something they were naturally attracted to. But these days it seems like there are as many, if not more, up-and-comers who look at the commercialization of the music industry (which has always been there, but not as blatently in the public's face as in the last 20 years or so) and see the music not as an end, but as a vehicle, a shortcut to all the garbage that comes along with being a music "star", rather than being a musician.

Which perhaps explains the Rush To The Big Red Button; "stars" don't make music, they make recordings; music just happens to be the excuse.

It reminds me of that great Peter O'Toole line form "My Favorite Year": "I'm not an actor, I'm a movie star!"



G.

 

[gecko zzed]

But these days it seems like there are as many, if not more, up-and-comers who look at the commercialization of the music industry (which has always been there, but not as blatently in the public's face as in the last 20 years or so) and see the music not as an end, but as a vehicle, a shortcut to all the garbage that comes along with being a music "star", rather than being a musician.

You see this most blatantly in shows like Australian (or American) Idol during the audition phase, with so many declaring that they want to be famous, they want to be the next idol. This is coupled with the cult of entitlement: "You must pick me because I'm passionate about my music and I want this so much . . . it's all I've lived for." In other words, 'desire' is a justification for having something.

It is fame that is the end game, not exploring your musical potential.

It's admirable to want to be top in your field (which is how we get the likes of Tiger Woods or Christian Barnard), but for me I like to think that achieving greatness is a by-product of excellence, not a reason for it.

 

[mferguson]

You see this most blatantly in shows like Australian (or American) Idol during the audition phase, with so many declaring that they want to be famous, they want to be the next idol.

LOL!!! I never will understand how so many tone-deaf people can actually think they sing well... but it can be funny. Unfortunately the bad auditions episodes end too quickly & are replaced with the never ending displays of somewhat decent singers getting way too much hype.

I also don't get how so many people can really want to be famous. I'm sure most kids have the kinds of fleeting images I once had of being on a big stage, but I also had a lot of apprehension about what that would really mean. It was bad enough having my mom work in my school district in a fairly small city - too many people knew who I was already! But I guess I've always been more philosophical & realistic than most people - especially as a kid. My point is, I wanted to be great, and be appreciated, & hey money is nice, but I've always been more ambivalent about the fame part.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

You see this most blatantly in shows like Australian (or American) Idol during the audition phase, with so many declaring that they want to be famous, they want to be the next idol.

Just a quick reality talent show sidebar: just a few minutes ago I heard them mention on the local news that Susan Boyle is going to be featuring a version of the Stones' "Wild Horses". Seriously. I didn't catch whether this was going to be on a TV show or studio recording, but either way.....ummm......WHAT???

But yeah, some people just have no pride, including those idiots who try out for idol just for the chance to get on camera as an idiot. That's just one step up from those who stand behind the TV reporter live on the street waving and giggling and blowing raspberries at the camera.

But what I fond most profound about these talent shows is that I can think of without breaking a sweat probably a half dozen local folks here I know who aren't the least bit interested in such shows who could easily meet or exceed the singing talents of most of the finalists on these shows. Some of them are working hard just below the surface of fame or have had short touches with fame over the years (see Lisa McClowery or Jerry Frank for examples), and others who just never chased the fame and are just happy with doing what they do as a second job earning a couple of extra bucks doing what they love.

Unfortunately (from my POV) many of these folks (not all) aren't really all that interested in actually recording except getting the occasional checks for performing as session cats for someone else. There's a whole LOT of talent out there in the world, only the tip of the iceberg makes it above the recording and fame surface, and that tip is not necessarily the cream of the crop.

G.

 

[miroslav]

It is fame that is the end game, not exploring your musical potential.

Fame and image...that's what most "artists" focus on these days.
The actual talent in most cases is just "filler".

And it's really funny, that often, those "artists" with the least amount of real talent, will make up for it by being over-the-top with their image (bad or good)...which usually becomes the main media focus.

I love when you occasionally get that humble yet very talented artist...they immediately shine through all the fame/image bullshit without doing nothing more than demonstrating their talent.
But there are fewer and fewer of those artists.
I don't mind the wild extrovert who also has the talent to back it up...but too often, most can't put their talent where their mouth is.

 

[Greg_L]

Holy fuck yall are some long winded mofos.

 

[RAMI]

Holy fuck yall are some long winded mofos.

HAHAhA!

 

[XLR]

Holy fuck yall are some long winded mofos.

HAHAhA!

...two of the most highly qualified guys around HR to actually talk about the thread's subject.

Sometimes I think there are a couple of HR's subforums that should have their title changed to the last 3 words of Greg's post.

 

[gecko zzed]

Holy fuck yall are some long winded mofos.

lol @ greg's attempt to derail the thread!

 

[noisewreck]

LOL!!! I never will understand how so many tone-deaf people can actually think they sing well... but it can be funny. Unfortunately the bad auditions episodes end too quickly & are replaced with the never ending displays of somewhat decent singers getting way too much hype.

I actually liked Adam Lambert this year. He's probably one of the most creative individuals I've seen on that show. I hope to hear/see more of him.

 

[Greg_L]

lol @ greg's attempt to derail the thread!

Lol @ lol spreading like the herpes!

 

[gecko zzed]

Lol @ lol spreading like the herpes!

It was a temptation impossible to resist

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Holy fuck yall are some long winded mofos.

Why, thank you! That's a real compliment.

The more we irritate some folk, the more we must be doing something right.

G.

 

[Greg_L]

Why, thank you! That's a real compliment.

The more we irritate some folk, the more we must be doing something right.

G.

Irritating? No, it's hilarious!

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Irritating? No, it's hilarious!

Well, in that case, it's good to know we can so easily put a smile on someone's face Makes us want to try even harder.

G.

 

[TeyshaBlue]

Interesting thread! It's funny to see the discussion move to the blues arena where the prevailing wisdom is that the blues greats had little or no theory training, but seemed to have an intuitive grasp of, at least, key centers.
Moving around in the blues world in the mid-90's, the one thing that struck me was, as theory stunted as BB, Lonnie Brooks, Buddy Guy, John Hunter, et al appear to be, their sidemen were anything but oblivious.
I remember visiting with Clark Terry in the early 80's. I met him through a mutual friend and over dinner, I expressed some frustrations with my improvisational disablilities.
"I hear all of these ideas when I'm soloing, but I can't seem to translate them into performance."

"Well, you don't know your scales, do you?"

"Sure, I know my scales! Who doesn't?"

"You think you do, but you don't and until you can master them in multiple octaves in every mode, you'll not have the technique to show us what you hear."
Best advice I ever received.
It's also somewhat applicable to the pedagogy of engineering. I wish everyone could start on a 4 track portastudio. It's there that the basics of signal flow logic, routing, even bussing is laid out in stark simplicity. Priceless.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

I wish everyone could start on a 4 track portastudio. It's there that the basics of signal flow logic, routing, even bussing is laid out in stark simplicity. Priceless.

Great post, Teysha! I agree, I'd also add to the above statement that it's amazing how much one can learn from messing around with an old-style analog synth, like a modular Moog, Paia, or Arp 2500/2600. The hardware is harder to find these days, but there are some decent VSTi emulators out there.

I grew up on 4-track as well (both open reel 3340 and a couple of generations of Poratstudio), and you're right, they are great learning environments. But I also learned so much about signal processing from several years messing with an Arp 2600 that I consider it an invaluable experience. Everything from envelope shaping and ADSR control to filtering, triggering and compression, to associating sounds with waveform shapes to managing gain structure is stuff you have to learn and deal with when you have a couple dozen patch cords dangling off the front of the synth to get your next interesting effect or sound .

G.

P.S. "Hung like a Naiant"? That's hilarious (not to mention mshilarious )