why bother learning any instrument other than the keyboard

[Eric VB]

Originally posted by TimR:

As I assume that the people who create these sound tracks are formerly trained musicians. Are they selling out? Anymore than the Graphic Artist who uses a Computer to design his picture instead of painting it using real brushes?

This came up in my class, too. The instructor's take was that at this point the technology wasn't good enough to replace real musicians, so don't worry, we're not out of a job.

 

Perhaps a better analogy of where we're at is clip art. Joe Public wants to make a poster for his band, "Flying Squirrel", but couldn't draw the rodent aviator to save his live. So instead he cops a cheesy clip art version. (A "sample", if you will.)

 

Of course, when he uses it as cover art for his CD that he's selling for $5 a pop, he's probably using the image in a way that is not covered under the license agreement he consented to by using the image in the first place. But that is a whole 'nother can of worms.

 

[Other than that, I totally understand the sentiment that some fine artists have for graphic artists. And don't you just love the "fine art" for sale at home decorating stores that is nothing more than an inkjet printout glued to a burlap backing on a flimsy stretcher with a cheesy frame? ]

[Eric VB]

Originally posted by dcr:

1. With the technology, a person can get the same performance results with a lower investment of time & practice.

 

Really? Imagine a keyboard so complex that it has apparatus & interfaces so that all variables can be effected. My guess is that such an instrument would be so complex, that mastering it would not save anything over learning the simulated instrument; or at least, it wouldn't save enough to make it worth all the investment in it.

Great points, dcr. Keep in mind, though, that for compositional work (i.e., not using the keyboard for a real-time performance), you can do things like record at a slower tempo and/or go back and edit characteristics about the MIDI data. Not quite the same thing, but commercial aircraft have an amazingly complex array of controls, indicators, etc. in the cockpit. It is managable, though, because the pilots don't have to be controlling everyone simultaneously.

There's craftsmanship, traditions, tangibility, intangibles...again, it's a whole area of human interaction that goes beyond an interest in the end-result sound.

There are instruments that have either been modified over the years to the point where they are markedly different from the original, or have been supplanted by "superior" sounding substitutes. My favorite example is the ophicleide (sorry, Jeremy, I know you're getting tired of hearing this ).

 

There actually are people bothered enough that they want to use authentic instruments for period music. For example, instruments of the same quality as those used in Mozart's time when performing music composed by Mozart. Not to mention using the same tuning standards; the A in A440 used to be quite a bit lower than 440 Hz.

 

In some ways it's like the vintage gear craze. If you can't have a '59 P-bass (or whatever), hopefully the repro will get you close.

[Eric VB]

Originally posted by jeremy c:

even an unsophisticated audience will feel the difference [between a sample library and real instruments], even if they can't identify what it is.

BTW, I really like what you're adding to the discussion, Jeremy.

 

This statement in particular really struck a chord with me. There was a time when the food you bought at the grocery store was not processed, or minimally processed (meat products cut to usable sizes, for instance).

 

My grandparents grew up then. They'd never eat margarine on their toast (only butter), and for coffee it had to be real cream. (My parents always had to go shopping for these kinds of items whenever their folks came by for a visit, because they weren't quite as "selective".)

 

Now we have generations that have grown up on twinkees and other such ingestible items (I hesitate to call it "food"). I admit, I've had my fair share of canned spaghetti with meat-like substances in the sauce. The problem is, if that's your only exposure to "spaghetti", you grow accustomed to it. At some later date you may find out what you've been missing, but you may always find the stuff that comes in a can to be palatable.

 

Just look at the grand results of shrinking school budgets, diminishing PE programs and lack of support for "after school sports", effective ads aimed at kids for products made with refined sugar, and the video game culture have had on our youth. Obesity has never been more popular.

 

What do you think the effect of shrinking school budgets on music programs will have when coupled with a steady diet of effective ads aimed at kids for unsubstantial music where mp3's are the rule and not the exception on the iPod culture of our youth?

 

Well, that's a littler farther than I wanted to take it, but I was shooting for "audiences may become accustomed to hearing samples over hearing real instruments".

[Eric VB]

Originally posted by 09:

By the way, has anyone heard the Vocaloid or Miriam products? It's really the state of the art in terms of vocal synthesis. It's still obviously fake, but give it ten years.

Again, 09, very insightful comments. I'll have to listen to the samples at home, on a slightly better audio reproduction system.

 

These were the products we listened to in class. Just the samples available on the web. This is what I based my earlier "they're good enough for BGVs but not lead" comment on.

 

I think it's the same kind of thing that TimR brought up when he said that a lot of sampled orchestras are finding their way into the final mix for end use in film or whatever. When it's on a more subliminal level, we're not as apt to notice that it's not real.

[picker]

Why learn any instrument but keyboard?

 

Because bass and guitar are FUN to play, as I suspect the drums are as well. Keyboards are a serious-minded instrument for serious-minded people.

I never met a dedicated keyboard player who wasn't at least a bit more serious and less prone to spontaneous clowning than most. The ones I have known were all pretty smart, and most of them were great guys, but they were almost always different somehow from the rest of the guys in the band. Maybe it's just me...

[Eric VB]

Originally posted by forceman:

People who can make accurate simulated music using electronics are, IMO, great musicians--not simply "technicians."

Steve, you're a guy with great knowledge and experience of few words. Hopefully I will mature to that point some day. (And everyone on the forum will be thankful they don't have to read my long-winded posts anymore. )

 

In a way this is what I meant when I said that visual artists have already blazed our trail. It's more about making art these days -- whatever that means -- than worrying about having a perfect brush stroke. There seems to be quite a lot of appreciation for original ideas and concepts over who can most closely replicate the Mona Lisa, for example.

 

Still, there is a calling for art in which the process of making the artwork is the defining element.

[jeremy c]

Maybe we are going to reach the point in music that we seem to have reached in computers.

 

The vast majority of the population uses stuff every day and not only that depends on it.

 

(You should have seen what happened at the school where I teach when the internet went down...they couldn't enter grades, take attendance, respond to parents, print report cards, run the library, do research, and on and on)("fix it, Mr. Cohen, please")

 

And there are a few trained experts who actually know how things work and create and maintain the hardware and software.

 

So we will have an elite class of actual musicians who will provide the samples and the vast unwashed hordes will use these samples to create what used to be called music.

 

 

By the way, I have heard baroque music played by an orchestra using original instruments (or reproductions), using just intonation. It was incredible and the music sounded better to me than it ever had before.

 

If you are a fan of J.S. Bach, I suggest you listen to The Brandenburg Concertos as performed by Nikolas Harnoncourt and Concentus Musicus Wien.

 

Another aside, when we talk about vintage instruments and six string basses, I'm always amused because I know someone who plays a bass viol (viola da gamba) which is fretted, has six strings and was built in 1703.

[wade_g]

This discussion is flirting with the question, can digital be as good as analog (synthesized vs. acoustic, solid-state vs. tube, it is real or is it Memorex, etc.)

 

Flat out, digital can never be as good. Mathematically, there are an infinite number of intervals between 0 and 1 (analog). A hundred years from now, technology will still have to round off those decimal places at some point. That means that something is lost.

 

Realistically, though, my finite brain might not care. Sure, I can pick out a bass part of a song better than the regular non-musician. But those SACD players are really close to the real deal to my ears.

 

I've wondered if Beethoven or similar would be able to stand the sounds of a keyboard.

 

Which makes me think of Bill&Ted's Excellent Adventure.

[Steve Force]

Originally posted by RicBassGuy:

Originally posted by forceman:

People who can make accurate simulated music using electronics are, IMO, great musicians--not simply "technicians."

Steve, you're a guy with great knowledge and experience of few words. Hopefully I will mature to that point some day. (And everyone on the forum will be thankful they don't have to read my long-winded posts anymore. )

 

In a way this is what I meant when I said that visual artists have already blazed our trail. It's more about making art these days -- whatever that means -- than worrying about having a perfect brush stroke. There seems to be quite a lot of appreciation for original ideas and concepts over who can most closely replicate the Mona Lisa, for example.

 

Still, there is a calling for art in which the process of making the artwork is the defining element.

LOL-- I actually got dinged during my MBA studies for being succinct rather than "wordy"--I guess a lot of this stemmed from my Microsoft days where email was fast, furious, and certainly not wordy..

 

I think we are all saying the same thing: that approaching realistic musical instrument sounds electronically is getting more and more possible--perfectly recreating them might not be possible (or even desired.)

 

Like you said, Rick: Can't we argue the same about visual arts? For example, a painting certainly cannot capture the "reality" of a landscape, ; a photograph also cannot.

 

Personally, I like a hot, sweaty jam (bass, guitar, OR keys) with real people far better than sitting alone in my studio piecing together drum samples or programming my DSI PolyEvolver keyboard (although this is extremely satisfying..)

 

BTW: Check out the recent Keyboard Corner compilation CD (volume 11) for one of my studio/synth compositions.