|
|
Post by admin on Oct 8, 2019 9:42:56 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by spacedog on Oct 8, 2019 10:11:26 GMT
Mmmmm, self-reflection is wonderful and offers the opportunity to realise that there are many lenses available through which to view the World, or even listen to it. Do we make music for ourselves, or for others...? Who do we want/need to please (if anyone)...? Having just the one non-changable lens can make someone perhaps a tad opinionated  The gear does not have the answers, but it certainly poses a lot of questions. Anyway, I haven't felt much like posting anything recently, however this video made me laugh - it could just be a couple of burglars who stray into a basement loaded with vintage equipment (oh no, it's about the equipment again) and proceed to create a Techno version of I Feel Love. I've moved the video in a bit, but the whole thing is fun, which is, essentially what this is all about. Do dance along... |
|
|
|
Post by admin on Oct 8, 2019 10:24:31 GMT
Thank you for posting this video spacedog it is awesome! I was recently caught up in a bad bout of gear lust mostly because I was searching for the perfect DAWless sequencing solution ... which then lead to the item in question being so far out of my price range that I despaired. Luckily I found a relatively cheap used BeatstepPro which I hope will alleviate my GAS for a bit  So this Reddit thread came at a good time for me where I questioned where I'm going with my hobby ... do I buy gear so I don't have to invest time to "properly" study music theory to become a better musician? Or have I just not found the right tools for a good workflow yet? I do find though that a lot of the music that I like has been made with lots of gear. |
|
|
|
Post by robertlanger on Oct 8, 2019 11:15:36 GMT
The vid is great! Nice to see some FORMANT modules, this was my beginning in Modular stuff 35 years ago 🤩
|
|
|
|
Post by Gaëtan on Oct 8, 2019 12:41:18 GMT
I don't know, I really get his point but I feel that the criticism is a bit unfair. It reads a bit like the OP of the thread is complaining that people don't make enough music that he likes (i.e melodic, composed pieces) and is falling into Sturgeon's law (i.e 90% of everything is crap). A lot of synth players are simply part of a "regular" band and often come from a piano or organ background, but they don't get much focus online (however the brands don't forget them, just look at most keyboard releases). Moreover the identified problems are not really specific to the synth world (the author even acknowledges it, but it is brushed over). Go to any online forum dedicated to most instruments and you will find countless discussions on the minutiae of the best material to make frets and neck bridges out of, which kind of transistor sounds better for a fuzz, and so on. I haven't honestly come across a lot of threads discussing how to write good songs either when I used to frequent bass forums. Can every musician benefit from music theory ? Honestly yes, I think so, but it's really not as easy to get into as I often read. I am still struggling with the basics 16 years after I picked up my first bass, even though I am used to learning new stuff in other areas of my life.
But yes, in a way this is exacerbated in the synth world because a big part of the gear, especially in modular, is about sequencing. Of course you can just have your synths laying around in the studio and have them be played by the track that you have carefully set up your DAW. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that but it's not a workflow that works for everyone nor every style. Hardware sequencing is fun but it is difficult, and people are still trying out a lot of stuff. There has been an explosion of choice this decade, which can definitely feed the gear-fatigue (I left Eurorack because of it personally).
|
|
|
|
Post by slowscape on Oct 8, 2019 18:50:25 GMT
GAS is real. And for me, it's the only part that I fully agree with in the article. Before modular I was into photography and had a brief phase of gear acquisition until I realized some of the first photos ever taken are still to this day some of the best shots I've ever seen. From there I stopped thinking about gear and started thinking about composition.
The rest of the post seems to do with taste, or perhaps a music theory class the author likely took. I don't know this for certain, but perhaps the producers of the stranger things sound track don't know how to talk about what they make. Maybe for them they are just looking for sounds, and then put them together to taste.
I think he fails to recognize that what he describes is where all music in general is going. To use techno as an example think about how it started. Taking the break of disco records and repeating it. Basically they made whole songs with the part that made people move the most. Then as the years pass you see new methods of making people move even more. This is what all music has been doing forever. You could probably draw the line all the way back to the first rhythmic sound made, but that's a study for someone else 
I'm obviously an amateur music maker, but for me music is less about theory and more about goals. I like the idea of starting with a goal. Do you want to make people move, sleep, zone out, think... and from there create something that attempts to accomplish the goal. |
|
|
|
Post by admin on Oct 8, 2019 22:42:05 GMT
Wow, thanks guys! I know that I posted a somewhat confrontational article here, but again the outcome, for me at least, was very worthwhile! I was introduced to Alexander Robotnik and his basement of vintage synth classics, Sturgeon's law (which I knew, but not by name) and I really like slowscape sentiment of making music with certain goals in mind. That's also how I approach my tinkerings: often I'm still starting with a technical question, eg. what can I don with this module that I haven't done before? But also more often now: How can I make a dance track, or an ambient piece or something Sci-Fi... I'm also seeing in many other people on the forum and also at our local Synth Club that they try a lot of different gear, always buying and selling until their rig crystallises into the right fit. So maybe the right way is to have a flow of gear ... you acquire something that you want to try out, but then sell something else away. It seems the second hand market is very strong for musical gear and would support this well. |
|
Lugia
Wiki Editors
Ridiculously busy...ish.
Posts: 556 
|
Post by Lugia on Oct 9, 2019 2:29:28 GMT
Amusingly, the same problem with "the gear will fix everything" has been around for quite some time. I recall something that happened over 25 years ago, back in the salad days of the Internet, when a poster got on one of the Usenet feeds and started blowing about how the brand-new E-Mu Morpheus he'd just bought was going to be his ticket to stardom. The amount of people who dove in to point out that "gear != talent, and talent = everything" resembled a virtual stampede. But it was quite justified, IMHO; there's NOT any sort of device (Autotune notwithstanding) that can slather on a layer of talent.
But at the same time...ah...OK, fine, I know who Easley Blackwood is, too. And Morton Subotnick. And Palestrina. And Josquin, Dunstable, Dufay, etc etc etc. And I studied theory, counterpoint, all of that fun stuff. But there is NO WAY IN HELL that I would ever begrudge someone in their exploration of music, irrespective of how much repetition and sequencing is present in what they do. If synthesizers are their chosen tool of exploration, cool. But just as cool would be the voice, saxophone, cello, piano, and the list goes on.
Fact is, we have absolutely ZERO way of knowing what the outward ripples of our musical efforts might cause at some other point in time or space. And then, combine that with the straight-up fact that musicians are...in the most basic sense of the word...all amateurs. Even the most burnt-out session players I've known will tell you that, even with the shortcomings, music is very much what they live for and what they love. Which gets to my issue with the OP dinging on experimental music.
Having the mindset of needing to explore music as if it were undiscovered country isn't something I'm inclined to slam. Even if some of the exploration leads nowhere, some of it eventually WILL hit a mark...at some point in time, or some place. And if it's repetitive...well, many things in nature as well as in man's own works are repetitive. I've heard this dinging of repetition before in academia, and my response then is still the same: one ignores directions in music at their own peril. EVERYTHING has a purpose to it...yes, even serialism, which Boulez finally threw up his own hands on after composing "Structures Ia". And if he hadn't, we wouldn't have learned that increasing amounts of abstracted systemization in music eventually leads to something that approximates chaos. And that's what "Structures Ia" sounds like...a rabbit-hole of musical disintegration. Wanna know how to get at that sort of sound? Just check it out.
Now, instead of approaching present-day electronics just from a gear standpoint and proclaiming that "new gear bad so new music from new gear bad" because there's sequencing and other things like that, I enjoy seeing how to _subvert_ all of the "normal" processes...and therefore, "do" as opposed to "say". For example, one of my favorite things in Ableton is to hot-wire it so that the computer itself starts to make "mistakes"...sometimes in sequencing, sometimes in processing, sometimes in recording and mixing, but still with an eye toward seeing if I can extricate the "human" that's hiding in the "machine". This doesn't always work, but then, it's not really supposed to be happening in the first place, so the fact that results DO happen is interesting in of itself.
Then there's an old idea I like to follow: the concept of "abuse potential". This is where the gear comes in. But at the same time, while acquiring gear, I'm trying to remain conscious of what possible combinations BEYOND a particular device might exist, and what might happen by adding the device in question to the fray in order to explore the possible outcomes. But I've found that, in order to maximize those potential outcomes, you have to employ a bit of self-discipline to keep the GAS issue from overriding the process. And that means not jumping on everything that pops up; for example, my current upgrades used to include the snarzzy new Yamaha MODX61...but after a bit of examination, it got tossed off the lists. Why? Well...it just wasn't all that. 8-op FM, sure...but I have Arturia's Synclavier V, which does that (and buttloads more) with no real degradation from the performance characteristics of the original Synclavier II (which I've both used and had). So...why have two of these things? Is the "abuse potential" high enough? Well, the answer to that was "no", so, no MODX61.
I suppose this is sort of rambly on my part...but ultimately, I don't think anyone has a right to "gatekeep" music, irrespective of their intentions. Conversely, I feel that if one, as a musician, has knowledge, then it should be passed on...even if the result from the receiving party is repetitive. Music should be like a tide that lifts all boats, especially since we really have not the faintest clue as to WHY it exists. If we can't completely sort out that one fundamental point, we (collectively) have no business playing King Canute with that tide.
|
|
|
|
Post by moruial on Oct 9, 2019 8:14:21 GMT
I'm relativly new to synth music, and music in general, and I still don't know where A, B, C, D,... are on a guitare, a keyboard or anything, all that music theory doesn't make a bit of sense to me and when I hear sombody talking about music theory I feel like I'm in front of a huge mountain, it's way to overwhelming for me. Yet, I stil enjoy playing my organ or synth because it's fun to me. I feel like a kid punching his toy to make sound. Well my ego make me feel like I'm doing better than a child but in the end it's still the same result: I press keys and a sound come out. I know try to make specific sound, but most of time it's by twisting knobs thinking I'm doinging something good that I get nice sound.
As someone says, most of musicians are amature, and it's great! Some of us just do music for the fun of it within any goal in the end. I do, and that is also why I don't publish anything because I don't think people will like and (and because I'm a fucktard perfectionnist and never satisfied by what I'm doing. Might also be because I'm afraid of to start doing things)
About the reddit post, I can't really disagree as what got me into synth music is the gear. I mean, damn guys, you can patch something and the music play itself!! You don't have to always be actually playing the instrument for sound to came out. Unlike guitar you have to practice every days to play something that make musical sense, with synth it's way more easy. Pulg in a sequencer, truns knobs, hit play and you have something nice playing. I think it's quiet normal it's more about gear, as most of musician are amature, they just tend to go the simpliest way of making something that move them untill thay can learn more and do more sophistiated things, I guess.
GAS is something terrible to me, as I fell like I want to try everything just for the fun of it, fortunatly for me being pooor helps a lot haha. But GAS is very understandable when everyday there is a new things out on the market. A new synth, a new midi controller, a new sequencer, a new pedal... Nowadays the wolrd is flooded with new tools everydays and as human nuture tend to be curious it's no surprise we all want to try new things, each one being more amazing than the last. And I tend to think that today, we don't have time to learn and achknolegde the last piece of equipment that a new one is already out. Technologie goes faster than music.
|
|
|
|
Post by slowscape on Oct 9, 2019 15:56:45 GMT
@careck you have a good point about getting gear, testing it, and either keeping or reselling it based on whether it fits your sound or not. This idea gets to the heart of GAS.
I think true GAS is "I need this because it will make me a better musician", not "I want this because I like the sound, or workflow".
moruial reminds me of another thing I thought about while reading the post. That being the authors disdain for automation. For me, that's one of the major draws of modular. I'm a programmer and visual artist way before musician. For me I see modular as physical programming (without the eye strain from screens!). I can't get enough!
Lastly, constraints (not buying something right away) can make way for more creativity. For me I feel like I need reverb, but that's currently not possible. So I am exploring delay and other ideas, learning a lot as I go.
|
|
|
|
Post by rodney on Oct 13, 2019 5:54:14 GMT
"I'm Rodney, and I have not bought another oscillator for ... almost 8 weeks!"
I think that, for me, constraints are what make me most creative. My recent AE shopping binge was triggered by my year with the Make Noise 0-Coast semi-modular and learning how to integrate it with my NovaDrones and other lo-fi sound-makers. I am attracted to things with chaotic outcomes from small adjustments. That is why the Nyle filter has my attention at present and has me looking through STM32 recipes to make something like MI Braids for the AE.
Back to constraints. Perhaps freedom is simply to enjoy a prison of one's choosing. I am hoping I can enjoy a sweet-spot for a time, hoping I have just enough modules to get lost in workflows that can frequently surprise me. I am still inclined more to improvise live than to commit my noodlings to a recording.
Another self-imposed constraint is my vow to make sure EVERY little Arduino, Photon, Esp32, STM32 and other MCU that I have stashed, unused, in my parts drawer(s) into a sound-maker or sound-processor of some kind. This coincided with my stumbling on the trail of AE Modular and its convenient 0-5v world, seemingly moments before I went shopping for a used Eurorack box and power supply (and we know well that road to ruin!). Luckily, the 0-coast is the only 'standard' +/-10v synth I have, so I can be happily constrained with its incredible range of wave-shaping chaos and convert the signals across for the AE modular where needed.
So, I can still pick up the whole 'studio' and hang it from a guitar strap. The arrival of the AE modular will necessitate a re-think...
|
|
|
|
Post by despairbear on Oct 17, 2019 5:39:21 GMT
I get what he's saying but I came from a highly traditional household and I was never really "grabbed" by a lot of traditional music with the exception of some classical composers. I've played my fair share of classical music (still do, take lessons to this day), studied music theory in college, but I always found myself more concerned with atmosphere than technicality. I get what the OP of the reddit thread is trying to say, but they're ignoring the differing roles that music plays in people's lives. I've never been the most social of musicians and to me art is the place that I go when I want to escape the structural limitations that are imposed on me day to day. Creating with synthesis is an escape for me, it's where I go when I want to explore, where I get to create my own rule sets. I also develop experimental PC games, again creating a world where I get to dictate the rules, how it operates, and what the goal is (if any). Some people have had enough of structure and rigid requirements and art is their sanctuary from it. For me imposing a "right way" in music or any art defeats the purpose of it and I quickly lose interest. This isn't that I'm against structure, I enjoy what it can produce quite a bit, but I feel like development as an artist often requires venturing into the unknown. In my opinion, those who don't ever discredit the rules are sort of a slave to a fear of sounding "bad". I enjoy beginning at a place that sounds "bad" and attempting to wrangle the chaos into something more listenable to me, to find form in something that initially appears formless.
|
|
pol
Wiki Editors
Posts: 1,349
|
Post by pol on Oct 20, 2019 15:59:33 GMT
One of the reasons I don't Facebook anymore is I got tired of "you need this to be good/ great" etc. and "everything post 1972/86/99 etc. is crap etc. This post/ thread etc. is just a variation on the theme, and brings in another of my favourites - you can't be any good without music theory. This is complete bollocks, what you need is to practise, learn your gear and how to play what you want to play... There's thousands if mot millions of great tunes out there with no music theory used in their making. It's all a case of each musician/band taking their path and doing what they do - whether you like it or not is irrelevant; most famous musicians singers I'm not very keen on, and there will be thousands more I've never heard of who are making a nice living thank you very much, and millions more who are just enjoying their music making journey.
|
|
