Why Do People Care More About the Sound of Music than Its Emotional Impact?

[Anderton]

Seriously. Have you seen any discussions recently about about gear that involved how it affects music's emotional impact? Musicians are blowing it. They spend more time on YouTube watching someone talk about how great a compressor or synth is instead of trying to figure out the qualities that make music itself special. Engineers care about the sound. Listeners care about the music. I'm starting to think too many musicians fancy themselves engineers, and forget why they're doing this in the first place. I guess the silver lining is that people who do think of the listener first have an advantage over the people who don't.

 

And I'm not talking about "the kids." It seems people of all ages have been infected with the belief that gear will make their music better. Sure, it can make the music sound better. But it will make the music better?

 

[Stan Martin]

What is "better"? More commercially succe$$ful? More thought  or emotionally provoking? 

 

For me, since I don't have to make money at it any more, it has to push one of my definitions of true "art" - conflict and resolution. And be emotionally cathartic. 

[Anderton]

19 minutes ago, Stan Martin said:

What is "better"? More commercially succe$$ful? More thought  or emotionally provoking? 

 

For me, since I don't have to make money at it any more, it has to push one of my definitions of true "art" - conflict and resolution. And be emotionally cathartic. 

 

Better is in the ear of the beholder, as is emotional impact. The question is what do musicians prioritize? If your priority is "it has to push one of my definitions of true "art" - conflict and resolution. And be emotionally cathartic," then at least I think that's better 

[KenElevenShadows]

Any gear that I use - music, recording, photography, whatever - is in service of the musical impact, emotion, and vision my art brings. Anything that interferes with that, I don't want to use. So gear matters in the sense that it should never impede what I want to create.

 

This is a broad view.

 

The idea here is that if something sounds unintentionally crappy, it's holding me back. If the sound is so distracting that it interferes with the listener's experience, it's holding me back. If my gear does not inspire me, it's holding me back. If I constantly hafta screw with it to get it to work, it's holding me back. If my camera, lens, or light painting gear looks bad enough that it interferes with the visceral impact of the viewer's experience, it's holding me back. 

[Stokely]

I definitely recognize that instead of watching videos about gear/plugins, I should be *over there* using the gear/plugins I already own.

Certainly when it comes to being a better player, the thing I need to be doing more is good ol practice on something, anything.  I sat down today to try to get better at percussive organ playing (e.g. Hush)--seriously, I love that stuff but absolutely suck at it--and with a simple  drum beat and bass line for just an hour made progress.  Imagine where i'd be if I'd been doing that daily for years    And then there's guitars....please nobody add up the video/forum time I've spent watching/reading about guitars and guitar gear and compare it to my actual guitar practice time.  It would be...lopsided and that is a regret (but you have to just look forward).

Back in the day I think many people practiced more--less distractions!   Not everyone, there's still those woodshedders out there even in this day of youtube and smart phones and (anti)social media.

[David Emm]

Let's set aside the fact that some of my music makes people want to beat it with a stick. 🙄 Part of my last year's worth of stack reduction was to address the distraction of clutter. I've got it down to a good grab-&-go environment. I'm concentrating better as a result. I still have a wad of instruments, but now, there's a clearly defined semi-orchestral layout of poly synths, physical modelers, a huge Sampler library and Spitfire sub-sections. I know where the right feels are. Damned if that hasn't made my work more cohesive.

 

I pick nights to do patch reviews and shape up my Best Of work libraries. On others, I write, do alternate takes and make rough pre-mixdown changes. I have my own sculpting process, but I (mostly) know when things are coming together and when they're still iffy. That always includes running it through the Does This TAKE You Anywhere? analyzer. Some pieces cook up into a nice pancake; others remain raw batter and get dumped. 

 

I very much regret not nabbing a book I once briefly encountered. It was about the creative process's abstractions and included an astounding list of 200 emotions that could be expressed musically. The emotional shadings were weirdly impressive. I've never been able to locate it. I think of that list as an ultimate Oblique Strategies card. 

 

Then there are the times that it feels as if my real inner voice needs 2 bass drums, 5 Octapads and titanium drumsticks. It'll be a mix of Keith Moon, Terry Bozzio and Animal from the Muppets. It'll scar the children a little.     

[Philbo King]

6 hours ago, Anderton said:

Seriously. Have you seen any discussions recently about about gear that involved how it affects music's emotional impact? Musicians are blowing it. They spend more time on YouTube watching someone talk about how great a compressor or synth is instead of trying to figure out the qualities that make music itself special. Engineers care about the sound. Listeners care about the music. I'm starting to think too many musicians fancy themselves engineers, and forget why they're doing this in the first place. I guess the silver lining is that people who do think of the listener first have an advantage over the people who don't.

 

And I'm not talking about "the kids." It seems people of all ages have been infected with the belief that gear will make their music better. Sure, it can make the music sound better. But it will make the music better?

 

It's probably because there no knobs in the rack called sympathy, happier, malaise, sorrow, joy, and most importantly sucks....

 

Emotion is harder than engineering.  No one ever tweaked a hihat sound enough to bring a tear to the eye of a listener. 

 

It takes storytelling to bring the listener along on a journey and an arrangement that complements and highlights the journey.  That is hard.  It takes more effort than pasting loops into Acid or whatever...

 

It is where art trumps (forgive my use of an obscenity) the technology.

 

YMMV

[ElmerJFudd]

I think what is different now, that has changed a bit, is the rise of influencers in the MI industry (and all industry).  So we get music makers featuring products in a mutually beneficial ecosystem.  It’s no longer an endorsement deal - it’s not just up and coming and established musicians playing a certain instrument.   It’s anyone, music makers of all experience levels, gear enthusiasts with small to gigantic collections, some buying gear, some renting, some being provided review copies, some being given gear, some being paid to review gear, demonstrate gear, give tutorials, use on a demo project that features the gear.  That’s a different kind of music - music developed to show what the gear sounds like.  
 

It’s extensive and it’s relentless and published daily because when there’s no new content views don’t go up and subscribers go down.   It has replaced brick and motor stores - we window shop vicariously through influencers because we can’t go to the shop to try it for ourselves.  
 

As a side note, I can’t think of any MI influencer’s music that I have listened to more than once.  From exceptional instrumentalists to singer song writers to gear enthusiasts.   But I play an awful lot of music that has connected with me in some fashion - usually through elements in addition to timbre, fx, mix, master, etc.  

[Anderton]

1 hour ago, ElmerJFudd said:

 That’s a different kind of music - music developed to show what the gear sounds like.  

 

That is incredibly perceptive.

[Anderton]

4 hours ago, KenElevenShadows said:

Any gear that I use - music, recording, photography, whatever - is in service of the musical impact, emotion, and vision my art brings.

 

So, you're kinda the poster boy for what I'm saying - prioritze the emotional impact over the gear.

[RABid]

It is hard to convey emotion when you are using a mouse to create and play music.

[KenElevenShadows]

1 hour ago, Anderton said:

 

So, you're kinda the poster boy for what I'm saying - prioritze the emotional impact over the gear.

 

I suppose so. I like gear, but I don't get hung up on it. And for me, all gear is in service of emotional impact, conveying the message, and artistic vision. 

 

I realize that other people might have different priorities. But that's what it's about to me. 

 

I think a lot of my posts in the past have reflected this in a big way, but it's a nice opportunity to say it directly.

 

 

[Anderton]

2 hours ago, RABid said:

It is hard to convey emotion when you are using a mouse to create and play music.

 

I'm always surprised at seminars when I ask how many people use control surfaces - basically a sliver.

[Notes_Norton]

18 hours ago, Anderton said:

Seriously. Have you seen any discussions recently about about gear that involved how it affects music's emotional impact? Musicians are blowing it. They spend more time on YouTube watching someone talk about how great a compressor or synth is instead of trying to figure out the qualities that make music itself special.

 

Corporate greed? They sell us “Tone” and all kinds of gear because it's profitable.

People have listened to music on 78 and 45RPM records, cassette tapes, and mp3s. And when you can get better definition on a CD, they still prefer compressed streaming.

 

Furthermore, if tone mattered, how did people like Dr. John, Stevie Nicks, Leon Redbone, Miley Cyrus, John Lennon, Blossom Dearie, and so many others with less-than stellar voices become such big stars? Could it be emotional content?

 

And what is good tone anyway? For guitarists, is it Jeff Beck? Slash? Wes Montgomery? Kirk Hammett? Eric Clapton? Eric Gale? Kenny Burrell? Carlos Santana? Duane Eddy? Terry Kath? Les Paul? Mary Ford? Samantha Fish? And on which guitar?

 

Knowing how an electric guitar sound is created, buying 'tone wood' is a waste of money for you, and a big profit for the guitar manufacturer. The vibrating string disturbs a magnetic field in the pickups which creates an electrical current which is then modified and amplified as it goes through the tone controls in the guitar (band-reject filter), FX pedals, preamp, amp, and speakers. None of this involves wood. You can shout in to a non-defective magnetic guitar pickup as loud as you can, and nothing will come out the speaker. So how does the sound of the wood matter? Even if the density of the wood shakes the pickups a bit, it's still no more than .0001%.

So for me, instead of spending money on tone, I'll spend time practicing, so that I can play the songs without thinking. That allows me to express my emotion. 

I go for emotional content over tone any day. As long as the tone is in the ball park for the genre of music, all that matters is the emotion.

But that's just me, YMMV

 

Insights and incites by Notes ♫

[cphollis]

Great sound can help with emotional impact.  As a BL, I invest in a great PA, mixer, etc. so our audiences can hear every nuance of what we're trying to do on stage.  The same is true for investing in simple lighting and staging.  But you hit the point of diminishing returns very quickly.

 

We're six musicians on stage, and not a lot of gear.  Acoustic drummer and guitarist, an electric guitarist with three simple pedals, me with a single stage keyboard and a controller, no fancy mics or vocal processing -- you get the idea.  The PA and lighting rig is premium, but dead simple and straightforward.

 

Spending more $$$ on gear would not make the band sound any better than it already does.

 

Personally, I'm quite happy with my current keyboard performance rig.  I had a deep fling with software instruments and plug-ins -- not to mention a few exotic hardware synths -- and then I was done.  I realized there wasn't much there for me.  At home, I play a nice acoustic piano -- ancient tech that still does the job.

 

The MI industry is like any other, they'll make whatever people will buy.  I think they're doing a good job of offering products to people who want to explore and play -- and proportionally spending less effort on gigging musicians.  Maybe it's because the giggers are usually broke

[RABid]

I remember my big breakthrough playing synths. Two actually.

 

One: Music is not divided into half steps. Sometimes the sweet spot is between the notes and the trick is to ease into it for just a moment, then ease back to the grid. Something you pick up playing guitar and sax. It took a while and a lot of practice to get this the way I wanted. Same with filter. It is not about making a filter go “wow”. It is the small inflections that bring the most emotion.

 

Two: Great solos don’t stick to the 16th note grid. Something I learned by listening to great guitarists is how to break the grid and evenly shove 5, 7 or 13 notes into a space. It adds another dimension. 

 

Kids that learn on FL or an electron box, well, not only do they not know how to do this. They don’t seem to know that the possibilities exist. 

[ElmerJFudd]

As music makers it’s important to remember that gear can be a distraction to arriving at the outcomes we want - which is generally speaking to create music that pleases us and our audience.  
 

There are so many options today from the MI industry (a sign of health, surely) that it can easily become a distraction.   Options have people reading manuals instead of practicing, performing and creating.  Clicking through timbres instead of committing, tweaking fx instead of honing lyrics, etc. 

 

Older people lament performing with their band and doing the record in one take. Or, Having only 4 tracks and a reverb box for outboard.   What’s stock included with any of the major DAWs is enough to slow down the most disciplined of music makers.  
 

(Is letting AI write, arrange, mix, master and distribute our music the cure?  I certainly hope not.)

[Anderton]

My cure has been if I can't say it with 8 tracks, it's probably not worth saying

[ElmerJFudd]

1 minute ago, Anderton said:

My cure has been if I can't say it with 8 tracks, it's probably not worth saying

Exactly, watch productivity rise as we impose limitations on ourselves.  

[Notes_Norton]

As a live performer, I have the advantage of watching the audience. They tell me if I'm doing it right or not.

I try to be melodic. Subtle differences in timing, intonation, ornaments, dynamics, and so many other things to be practiced at home until they become natural are essential.

 

Then, when I'm performing, I don't think about those things at all, because they are part of my vocabulary, they come out naturally. Actually, I don't think about anything at all, I get into that place where there is no space, no time, no me, but just the music flowing from me but feeling like it is flowing through me. The reaction from the audience completes the circle.

 

I make my own backing tracks from scratch. First, I want the drums right, it has to groove, and be the proper groove for the song. Then I layer the bass and other instruments on. All the subtle differences are included here, but in a different manner, so the background is a cohesive unit which complements the melody maker (singer or instrumentalist).

 

There is a sweet spot in buying gear where adding X amount of dollars does not give you more than say 10% change. The greater that X is, the less inclined I am to buy the gear.

I want the sound to be clean and competitive. But a $4,000 Neumann microphone isn't going to make my sax sound enough better for my purpose than a $400 Sennheiser MD421. 

I have 2 tenor saxophones. One is a custom model and the other a semi-pro Yamaha. Most gigs I take the Yamaha. Why? They both sound great, they both have good intonation, and since most of our gigs since COVID are outdoors, if the Yamaha gets weathered, the loss is less. The audience doesn't know the difference. The Yamaha is just a bit brighter, but depending on the listener, that could be an advantage.

I also think learning other instruments helps you play your primary instrument better.

I started on drums, because my then small-town school didn't have any other instruments to rent. When the tenor sax player moved, I took over that rental instrument.

 

Traveling in road bands, I had the guitar, bass, and keyboard players teach me their instruments. On the gig I would switch from sax to guitar, bass, or keyboard on a few songs. It's good showmanship, and it taught me a lot about their place in the ensemble. I also taught myself wind synth, flute, and vocals (a little coaching help was a blessing on the vocals).

 

My primary instrument is saxophone/wind synth. Having experience on the other instruments has helped my expression on the sax immeasurably. Knowing their place in the mix helps me define my place in the mix, so that I can use that to play the right things at the right time. Like melody, no thinking is involved on stage, just the so-called 'right brain' experience.

 

My objective is to project my emotion and hopefully share that with at least some of the audience members.

Insights and incites by Notes ♫

[ProfD]

Back in the 1980s, it seemed like new synths and eventually samplers were being released every month. 

 

As a budding musician, I totally enjoyed reading Keyboard, EM and other magazines. 

 

I still enjoy trekking to the music store in order to lay hands on new gear too.

 

However, about 2 decades ago, I realized anything I want to say musically (emotion) can be accomplished with an electric piano. 

 

Synths and samplers can provide what I call sprinkles  but the cake I bake (music) is fine without it too.

 

i try to temper my posts so that it doesn't come across that I'm anti-gear.  I'm really not.  Still a gear-head from a technical perspective. 

 

But, I've seen enough analysis paralysis in musicians especially those with a ton of gear and well equipped studios than they know how to use. 

 

The same folks spend a lot of time in the studio yet produce nothing musically.  When they're not fumbling around on the gear, they are watching YouTube videos for new gear.  It becomes optical gear hoarding.🤣

 

It's cool if the goal is to be a hobby musician with a sh8t ton gear.   Many folks need some type of time sink, distraction or opiate in order to make it through life.  Music gear is harmless in that regard.

 

But, as it relates to producing music, it doesn't take a whole lot of gear and/or sounds to create an emotional impact.  Music begins and ends with harmony and melody.

 

Strip away the layers of sound, multitracked parts, mix, etc., the emotional impact of a piece of music holds up well when it's played on a single acoustic or electric instrument.   Also, it still sounds *good* even when played through a crappy audio system/file format.😎

[GovernorSilver]

Great interview with Jeff Baxter.  The Vertex guy has a several other great interview videos with great session musos.   But this one is particularly ironic because he makes gear for a living, yet the bulk of Baxter's iconic work was done on guitars he built out of salvaged parts, and seems like half the guitar parts were recorded direct to mixer instead of through boutique amps.  Also notable is an absence of expensive guitar pedals - no Klon Centaur needed to for awesome Skunk guitar tracks.

 

He did acquire some Roland guitar gear that was not cheap at the time but that was probably just part of Roland's compensation to him for his work for Roland.

 

 

 

[Notes_Norton]

22 hours ago, ProfD said:

i try to temper my posts so that it doesn't come across that I'm anti-gear.

Nor am I.

Along with my sax I play a wind MIDI controller hooked to an old FM synth and a new Physical Modeling synth.

There is a difference between gear to make your product better, and excess gear that really doesn't make that much of a difference.

The point between the two, depends on your situation. New gear has to be worth the money to me. I play music for a living, if I were to splurge on a 1950s Stratocaster signed by some star (which I would never do) that means quite a few paychecks are going to something that will not work much better than a Yamaha Pacifica strat.

For me, all my gear, including the instruments, are tools. All that matters is their function. So when I bought my Parker guitars (one and a spare) I didn't go for the extra fancy finish which doubled the price of the same guitar. Good old varnished wood was good enough for me. 

 

But that's me. I get my kicks when performing, not by collecting. There is more than one right way to do this, and that's just my way.

 

Notes ♫

[Sundown]

Hi Craig,

 

I think the short answer is marketing is powerful, and right now marketing is focused on gear and software (and it has been for at least 40 years).

 

We’ve probably all found ourselves in the trap at times, and it’s a really powerful message when a reputable manufacturer tells someone that their shortcoming can be solved with product XYZ. And we’ve all felt that shortcoming …

 

Marketing has changed a bit in the last ~30 years, as I find more emphasis now on retro/repeat-the-past sounds than I did in the 80’s or 90’s, but the overall corporate goal is the same:  Sell a product for whatever weakness the consumer feels. 

 

There is definitely a fulcrum of gear that you need to reach a goal, and that can take time to acquire. Even in today’s computer-based world a proper home studio is a significant investment. But once you’ve reached that fulcrum, the challenge isn’t sound quality, but all of the hard work, knowledge, and experience to make quality productions or performances. But you can’t monetize that, and we all have imposter’s syndrome to some extent and that makes us vulnerable to empty gear promises.

 

And let’s not forget that today’s low-budget gear is still pretty damn good … I don’t doubt that a Neumann mic or Neve preamp will give you the last 10%, but the fact that a budget condenser and a Mackie compact mixer can get you 80-90% there is amazing. The gap between boutique and budget is shrinking for the average listener.

 

Todd

 

 

 

 

[Anderton]

On 9/12/2024 at 10:35 AM, ProfD said:

i try to temper my posts so that it doesn't come across that I'm anti-gear.  I'm really not.  Still a gear-head from a technical perspective.

 

I think your posts come across as being judicious about the user of gear, not anti-gear.

 

As I've said before, the gear is about the sound, the human is about the music. I do find that compelling sounds can support (or as you say, "provide sprinkles to") the music. Also, certain sounds evoke certain emotions in people. When I include a string quartet part in a song, it's going to trigger a different reaction than if I played the same lines on overdubbed guitars. In either case, the music is the same, but the listener's visceral reaction with be affected.

 

Of course, we're still talking about musical impact. But it's the gear that allows me to create a string quartet in the first place.

 

I guess an analogy would be clothing. It has nothing to do with the body itself, but it can accentuate particular physical features. The "I don't need gear" approach is like "my clothes keep me from going naked in public and not getting arrested, so they're doing their job." The judicious use of gear is "this scarf really adds a nice accent." The excessive view of gear is "I'm going to buy different fast fashion every week, toss it away and get something new, and to hell with the environmental consequences."

[ProfD]

2 hours ago, Anderton said:

 

I think your posts come across as being judicious about the user of gear, not anti-gear.

Exactly. It's all about the carpenter using the right tools on the job. Same goes for musicians. 

2 hours ago, Anderton said:

As I've said before, the gear is about the sound, the human is about the music. I do find that compelling sounds can support (or as you say, "provide sprinkles to") the music. Also, certain sounds evoke certain emotions in people.

It always comes down to serving the music.

2 hours ago, Anderton said:

The excessive view of gear is "I'm going to buy different fast fashion every week, toss it away and get something new, and to hell with the environmental consequences."

Hilarious. That about sums it up.🤣😎

[Notes_Norton]

16 hours ago, Anderton said:

The excessive view of gear is "I'm going to buy different fast fashion every week, toss it away and get something new, and to hell with the environmental consequences."

IMO that's one thing wrong with the world. The fashion industry was invented by the textile companies, in order to sell more product.

Selling more product, when not needed, is one of the major causes of the degradation of our environment.

 

Do you need that new car when the old one is running fine? Or that new iPhone? Dress? Shoes? Guitar? Saxophone? Does your kitchen need remodeling because those granite counters are sooooo last year. And so on. Or do you just want it.

We've created a monster, and so many people's jobs are involved in feeding that monster, if we quit 'cold turkey' there would be a depression. Perhaps we should all just gradually taper off buying things we want but do not need.

[Stan Martin]

This may be unpopular, but it's how I feel:

 

More betterer newer gear does not replace scales and arpeggios and music theory and ear training.

 

And, especially - - taste.

[David Emm]

On 9/12/2024 at 10:35 AM, ProfD said:

Strip away the layers of sound, multitracked parts, mix, etc., the emotional impact of a piece of music holds up well when it's played on a single acoustic or electric instrument.   Also, it still sounds *good* even when played through a crappy audio system/file format.😎

 

Hear hear! I enjoy recalling David Bowie's comment to Rick Wakeman, who was worrying over beefing a song up with synths, etc.

He pointed at a battered old upright and said "Rick, if it sounds good there, it'll sound good anywhere."

[Anderton]

21 hours ago, Stan Martin said:

 

And, especially - - taste.

 

Where can I buy this Taste plugin? Can I get a perpetual license, or is it subscription-only?