Question for music makers

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sigma9
  • Start date Start date
S

Sigma9

New member
With all the new fangaled 'Music work stations" and keyboards that have some high tech accompaniment, At what point are we not really making our own music anymore? I mean, if we tell the workstation what chords to play, are we still creating our own music? What if someone used the same exact work station as you to make a simular song with only the chords being different but the "feel" of the work station being exactly the same?
 
i use my drum and bass machine to get an idea of how i want a song to go or to give the band something to start with.when it comes to the final product i want real musicians playing ,not machines.
 
I know what you're asking. I agree that if you use sounds out of the box, you're not not being creative. I have MUCH more respect for people who play their own instruments. Drum machines are acceptable if you do your own programming.
 
I don't know of any musicians who use auto arranged backing tracks and are actually taken seriously. Usually it is pretty exclusive to lounge type, cover acts.
 
I use Band-In-A-Box and Jammer often to work out a basic template. And fairly often I may keep the drums and/or bass parts and add whatever other parts I need (although I almost always tweak those "canned parts" to some degree).

Now to qualify this I must point out that I'm a very good drummer, a pretty decent keyboard player and a fair guitarist - perfectly capable of recording my own parts (subject to my own limitations).

However, many times the song does not require a complex or an original drum or bass part - and candidly, I'de rather spend more effort on the vocal, harmonies and primary melodic parts (which are what really sell a song)!!.

Now just for the sake of debate - I would contend that useing session musicians (which is common on all but the most "home made" of recordings (and yeah I realize this is a Home Recording site) is by it's very purpose turning over part of the creation process to someone else (as is useing engineers and producers) - so why is useing a computer program to come up with a bass line any different than paying Will Lee to come up will a bass line???

Although I do conceed that if we all use the same computer program the same way we will tend to sound alot alike (hey I just explained "pop radio"!!!!)
 
I'm a non-performing songwriter who, until recently, used analog multi-trackers to prepare work tapes and simple demo tapes. I'm now getting accustomed to using the BR-1180 CD for the same purposes. I have never been able to bring myself to use Band-In-A-Box or backing tracks, though such programs would sometimes make my life easier. Basically, I have too much respect for studio and working musicians to do so. Another reason is that I've seen the look on A&R and Creative Directors' faces when they listen to a demo using packaged backing and instrumentals. The typical response involves swearing and using the submitted disc as a frisbee.

At the same time, I'm at the bottom of the ladder as a writer and I can't afford to use live musicians on all my worktapes or demos. Sometimes I barter a limited license to use a song for live performance in exchange for a local group playing the session. That way have they some original material to perform and I have a respectable demo that I don't feel guilty or embarassed to pitch.

I'm not knocking anyone who uses canned music; that's a matter between a writer and his or her conscience, but I want nothing to do with it. I think if people who use such procducts for demos could see the reaction of the people they're pitching to they would think twice about using them.
 
I'm all for real performances from real people - I personally find no greater pleasure than getting into a great feeling groove with good players - but canned music, loops and other "non-performance" production is to a degree a reality of todays musical industry. I don't always use Band-In-A-Box (or Jammer, or sampled loops, etc) but I do use them often - in particular when I'm arrangeing and producing basic demo's for songwriters who can't afford to pay me to spend 10 hours trying to get a solid drum, bass, piano, etc, etc, track. With BIAB I spend 10 minutes entering a chord pattern and the "band" is ready to put down a solid (although somewhat uninspired) backing track.

A songwriter I work with (with my musical assistance) got a song placed in a movie direct from Band-In-A-Box (useing the actual demo we sent out). I added real guitar and some string lines (and added a bridge to the song) and we had a great singer (a great singer is always a must have!!!) - but the point is the song was placed with the original BIAB performance (and although I almost always tweak BIAB - this particular writer did not want it tweaked).

Now I'll be the first to admit, that when we sent out the demo, there were certain BIAB "riffs" that I thought were too obvious, but it sold (so obviously my instinct as a producer was dead wrong).

Now I agree with Peter D that canned music does hurt some working studio cats (hell, when drum machines first came out I lost almost all the studio work I was doing - until I bought a drum machine and learned how to program it better than the keyboard players!!!) However, home studios have hurt alot of "real studios" which in turn hurt alot of studio cats (so who will cast the first stone???). That's the way it is and we have to accept that (and as a working musician for over 35 years I feel I'm qualified to make that statement.

I am not in favor of useing completely canned arrangments - but as stated in my previous post, I'm not convinced that useing a computer generated bass line (or drum beat) is much different (from a creative standpoint) than having a person create a bass line - as a writer, arranger or musician - you still have to react to that part and create other parts which work with it.
 
I have heard some good MIDI stuff on the net................
I suppose it all depends on the soundfonts used....and the ability of the composer to normalize...........

but, nothing beats real instruments.....
 
joro said:
I have heard some good MIDI stuff on the net................
I suppose it all depends on the soundfonts used....and the ability of the composer to normalize...........

but, nothing beats real instruments.....
Click to expand...

Of course there is no substitute for real musicians, but still, MIDI can be a really useful and versatile resource.

I sing classical and Broadway, and quite honestly I can't afford the cost of hiring an accompianist every time I want to practise - even if I could find pianists that easily. Since I learnt to sequence MIDIs from scores, using a notation program (MOZART), I'm able to get at least some idea how I want a song to sound. Also, I can reconstruct difficult-to-find scores by importing midis into the same program, and MIDIs help my daughter, a rather poor sight-reader, to learn new songs.

Not every MIDI on the web is depressing Band-in-a-Box stuff, either. A lot of sequencers take their hobby very seriously indeed: there are some really good examples on, say, the Classical Midi Archives, and there's one chap, David Barnes, whose MIDIs of Beatles' songs are quite superb.

Obviously the MIDI synth on your soundcard is important. I've got round shortcomings in mine by converting some good soundfonts to dls. format and playing MIDIs in DirectMusic Producer.

Sarah
 
Music

The strenght of a song comes from its melody and from what the artist was feeling at the time. These computer gizmos can never seek to replace that; they can only help build on it. If you put together a song simply by assembling loops, waves, etc..is it really a song? possibly.....does it have a soul..definetely not...

songwriters are true artists....the rest is just machinery
 
I guess I should have qualified my remarks in my previous post by saying they were directed toward songwriters using such programs to produce demos or worktapes that are submitted to publishers, managers, etc. I understand and appreciate the technology that helps a singer, musician, et.al to rehearse, develop or learn material. Like so many things in music, whether to use such technology to pitch a songwriter's work is a matter of taste and choice. I think it also probably depends on the genre of music and who you're pitching to.
 
I program my drum machine(turn off the bass prog) and to be honest with ya it would be easier for me to play the drums than program that damn machine but I cant afford a set, and all the mics it would take. Other than that I do all the instruments Gtr, Bass, vocals thru the mixer board to the computer recording software. I may use a little midi synth sounds for intros but other than that its all done the ol fashioned way. To me its all like credit. If you aint got the cash to pay for it, dont use that plastic. The same goes for music. If you cant reproduce it live, your cheating.....This is just my own personal Opinion. Im not saying doing stuff with a synth emulating other instuments is wrong. Just preprogramming an entire song with a computer doesnt seem to be much fun.....
Myx
 
i too..play everything that i record guitar drums bass(guitar thru a bass effect)..and sing (including all the backups)...now im not the best at any of these things ...and in truth i used to feel strange about even putting backups on my songs (how would i play THAT live)????..but since im recording in a 12x12 room , by myself, with little to no experience..i figure anything i can do to make it sound like more is going on than there is...i also dont record from computer program im on a d.a.w. so it sorta demands that you play most of it....and really im waaaaay too lazy to try to figure out how to run some plugin or whatever they call them... :D


jamal
 
You are still doing it Jamal(backups) Heck I could'nt play guitar and sing at the same time live unless I spent a considerable amount of time practicing it...(Im lazy also) but my point is can another human being learn what you did and do it live.....The Beatles didnt have the technology to reproduce there stuff after mystery tour and sgt peppers live... They got to elaborate for their time in the studio. Some say thats the real reason why they broke up....
I miss playing live, but I also miss my wife and they both had more troubles than they were worth...... BTW-plugins are not that labor intensive-lol
Myx
 
How do u put you songs together.?

when i write a song i like to keep the part the way i right it then introduce it to the band for the rest of the parts but the second guitar part is allways like a solo or something i dont want but i just don't say anything... If i haven't confused my question is Do u put all the parts down first then take them to you band mates and tell them what to play or do you do what i do.
 
How do u put you songs together.?

When i write a song i usually play the song i want to play i organize it then take it to practice have the band make the parts and fix whatever needs fixin or doens't fit then i call it yankee. well sometimes when i want a rythem part to the song like 2nd guitar it allways turns to a solo or something else. what i'm trying to say is that should i make all the parts like the 2nd guitar and 1st and let the bassist and drummer make there own (those 2 are fine)
 
I don't consider my use of a drum machine "cheating". I have always paid particular attention to the drumming on my favorite songs, and coupled with my schooled musical training I had no difficulty in turning this hunk of electronics into a dynamic musical instrument. I spend a lot of time trying to organize the patterns because I use up the memory about every 10 songs. I've also taken the time to figure out how to actually tune the thing, which was no easy task since it uses a weird "step" terminology (but it's worth it. Imagine the ease of having a drummer always in tune). I play the crap out of my machine.

Plus, SMPTE is a life saver. You can record all the drums, and then switch out, say, the hi-hat if it's thrashier than you originally intended. I only have an ADAT and am saving up for a DAW. I can record SMPTE on one track, mono drums on another, and use up the other six tracks and when the DAW comes in I can synch up 10 or 12 tracks for drums with the original performance.

Outside of playing with a good, live drummer that you are tight with, the only drawback to drum machines is their lack of playing in the pocket. But this really isn't that much of a problem if you keep the hits simple and separated. Only good drummers will really know the difference.

Cy
 
An artist is one who creates. no one ever said what tools have to be used to create. If you play an instrument fine thats your thing but some people prefer the tecnological approach. Thats there thing. If you feel like anyone programming isn't making music then you are sadly mistaken. There are musicians who feel like you using all those compressors and electric gear makes you a step lower than them because they are strictly acoustic. It is the nature of man to put down others for what they do and how they doo it to make them feel important. Dont get me wrong it is good to be able to play an instrument it takes skill and patience and time to learn. Countless hours of devotion to practice. But it takes those things to learn and use all those gizmos in a box to. Both ways take an effort just appreciate both for what they are.
Apples and Oranges.....both taste different ....but both are still fruit
 
Soundboy - I agree with what you're saying, but creating a soundscape or composing with technology is an apple to the orange of songwriting. Composers have been been using technology for, at least, 100 years to create musical compositions, but that doesn't make them a songwriter. A song is, by definition, the application of words to music. I don't want to belabor a point of semantics, but it seems that people lately have a tendency to change the meaning of words to fit whatever they want them to, i.e, politicians and journalists.

Also, I don't think anyone was "putting down" folks who don't play instruments and use technology in their composing or songwriting. There are a number of great songwriters who never played a musical instrument. Sometimes when we have these discussions I think it would be useful if we had some understanding of the historical context that we're working in. As wonderful as the current technology is, it is no more amazing or cutting edge than when honky tonk piano players found they could get a louder, more unique sound out their pianos by putting thumb tacks on the hammerheads where they struck the strings. Technology is a great thing, but it still doesn't turn me into a doctor or a lawyer and it doesn't turn its users into songwriters without some innate talent or willingness to learn the craft itself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top