Lee Flier Posted March 29, 2001 Share Posted March 29, 2001 Wow! Pretty hard hitting stuff here! I love it! http://www.newtimesla.com/issues/2000-06-15/music.html --Lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miroslav Posted March 29, 2001 Share Posted March 29, 2001 Here's my $.02...again. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000915.html miroslav - miroslavmusic.com "Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aframe9999 Posted March 29, 2001 Share Posted March 29, 2001 this is stuff I've always felt. I just couldn't ever verbalize like that. Good stuff!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fet Posted March 29, 2001 Share Posted March 29, 2001 Great article. Increasingly it becomes necessary to bypass the mass media wherever possible, as a musician and as a music consumer; less money in the loop may equal more happiness. I have felt no need to watch MTV or listen to pop radio for many years now... but still I manage to make music I like for a small group of like-minded listeners, and what more can one ask? I persist in believing that there is an audience for truth and soul in music or any other art. People know it when they hear it, and they respond to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 29, 2001 Share Posted March 29, 2001 Excellent article! Thanks for the link. Rod Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Flier Posted March 29, 2001 Author Share Posted March 29, 2001 fet: Totally agree with you. I never watch MTV or VH1, or listen to commercial radio anymore. I have bought a few major label releases in the past year but most of the stuff I've bought has been independent. And I can HONESTLY say I like the indie stuff so much better. The fact that you can pay $5 to see a local band, and hang out and have a drink with them after the gig, as opposed to shelling out $75 for nosebleed seats for a national act where you can't even see them except on the video screen, is a perk too. One thing that hasn't been mentioned much in all this RIAA/Napster hoopla is that if indeed CD sales figures start dropping, it may not be free downloads at all that are to blame. It might be legitimate competition from DIY bands whose sales figures fly under the RIAA's radar. The RIAA figures from last year indicate that rock is still the most popular genre - and maybe rock fans are not as easily fooled as the labels think. Who wants to listen to all this overprocessed crap when you can buy an indie band's CD and have it be "for real"? --Lee This message has been edited by Lee Flier on 03-29-2001 at 03:17 PM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Hughes Posted March 29, 2001 Share Posted March 29, 2001 It's an interesting articlem but the doesn;t know what he or she is talking about: "The efficient use of today's standard digital outboard gear requires that the original signal be generated in either a dead studio or sent direct into the mixing board. Subtle chording or bending strings, or the tactile profile of any genuinely musical player threatens the effectiveness of these digital fogs, which are preferably programmed by keyboards." Lee, do you find that when you play subtle chords or bend strings that the effectiveness of your 4416 is at all threatened? Does anyone who records digitally find that they are required to record in a dead room? "Or the drums can be set for use as triggers that send an ideal "canned" percussive incident to tape." Does this person not know what a "sample" is? I think most people these days have an idea what a sample is, and to use the phrase "canned percussive incident" is just bizarre. He or she brings up some interesting points, but the writer seems a little too much like chicken little. Jonathan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Flier Posted March 30, 2001 Author Share Posted March 30, 2001 Originally posted by Jonathan Hughes: Lee, do you find that when you play subtle chords or bend strings that the effectiveness of your 4416 is at all threatened? Does anyone who records digitally find that they are required to record in a dead room? Yeah, there were definitely a few technically wonky things in the article. I think the visceral impact was more important than the technical details. Which, come to think of it, was exactly the writer's point. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif --Lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tedster Posted March 30, 2001 Share Posted March 30, 2001 >>>When Metallica begin recording an album, the drummer works solo for a month because it takes that long for his engineer to go through every single percussive incident and move it into its perfect, proper place. To do this, drums must be recorded with perfect separation so that microphones pick up only the individual drum or cymbal they are set on, and not the neighboring drums or cymbals Well, I know that this advanced separation seems to be a goal...which was the point of my thread "Isolation"...the statement "all the great jazz albums were recorded live"...despite minor differences in actuality, this article pretty much sums it up. Why radio sucks, why music sucks, sheesh, there's no gravity. The world sucks. When you are expected to go into a vocal track and remove all the breaths... (Sigh)... "Cisco Kid, was a friend of mine" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHAN Posted March 30, 2001 Share Posted March 30, 2001 Great article Lee.It really struck a chord in me ! But I don't think we should blame the computer. The industry itself is at fault IMO. Jonathan, my take on the phrase "canned percussive incident" was that the author was making fun of replacing perfectly good "REAL" drum sounds with sterile samples, to protect the "SONIC PERFECTION" of the final product. I for one WHOLEHEARTEDLY AGREE ! ! ! ! ! ! KHAN(Always hopeful yet discontent) BTW Lee. I was wondering why charlie Watts playing has improved so much on the last couple albums...oops, CD's http://cwm.ragesofsanity.com/s/cwm2/cwm27.gifhttp://cwm.ragesofsanity.com/s/cwm/uhoh2.gif So Many Drummers. So Little Time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anderton Posted March 30, 2001 Share Posted March 30, 2001 No one's holding a gun to these people's heads. You don't have to quantize. You don't have to edit out breaths. I like computers because they allow me to be MORE spontaneous. No matter how long it takes for my machines to boot up, it's much less time than cleaning heads and checking azimuth. And I've got news for all these writers: what makes them think that comping is the result of computers? As soon as musicians had multitrack tape, they were comping solos together from bits and pieces, erasing over segments to correct one wrong note, etc. I sampled a note on a master tape in 1985 to an Emulator so I could pitch bend the out of tune note, then ran it back to tape. As I've said before: Machines don't kill music, people do. Craig Anderton Educational site: http://www.craiganderton.org Music: http://www.youtube.com/thecraiganderton Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/craig_anderton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Flier Posted March 30, 2001 Author Share Posted March 30, 2001 Originally posted by KHAN: Great article Lee.It really struck a chord in me ! But I don't think we should blame the computer. The industry itself is at fault IMO. Oh, definitely! As Jonathan and Craig pointed out, plenty of us use digital gear without resorting to this kind of fakery. The trouble with technology is that a lot of people get so enamored of it that they HAVE to use it to the extreme, ALL the time, just because it's "there". And without thinking about what they lose in the process. I'm sure the trend will pass, but then I'm just as sure something ELSE will be invented that will drive us all up a wall for a few years until people get a clue how to use it, not abuse it. BTW Lee. I was wondering why charlie Watts playing has improved so much on the last couple albums...oops, CD's http://cwm.ragesofsanity.com/s/cwm2/cwm27.gifhttp://cwm.ragesofsanity.com/s/cwm/uhoh2.gif Yo!! Charlie is DA MAN!! You diss Charlie, you PAY!! http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif --Lee This message has been edited by Lee Flier on 03-29-2001 at 05:24 PM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curve Dominant Posted March 30, 2001 Share Posted March 30, 2001 I thought I'd take a break from sampling drum loops to read this article. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif Yet another cranky diatribe from someone who expects the world to be frozen in 1957, when rock & roll was "pure." Yeah, OK, Doc. Well, I grew up in Philadelphia, where the Mafia controlled radio and the clubs in those days. When I started playing in clubs in the 80s, they were still owned and operated by the mob. So I never experienced this fairie-land where rock & roll was a free and democratic communal love-in, eternally financed by some fairie-godmother who made every schmuck with a guitar rich and famous just because they wanted to be. >>Radio programmers still have the music industry by the balls<< Bullshit. It's the advertisers that have the radio programmers by the balls. This guy doesn't know jack-shit about this business. And I have to take major issue with his bashing Dave Grohl, which got that whole article off to a terrible start. Dave Grohl is one of the best rock drummers ever, and the Foo Fighters is his gig. He had every right to track the drums for his own project, and Bill Goldsmith is a little fucking baby for taking issue with it. I don't get it. We are talking about show-business, here; it is the business of illusion. You cannot apply the same standards of purity and moral uppityness and snobbery to rock & roll that one would apply to a priest or a nun. It is a medium that is made to be constantly destroyed and refashioned in the image of a new era, a new generation, and a new set of tools of expression. Wake up! Cut & paste sampled & looped noise IS the new punk rock. I can't remember how many times, Lee, that you have chortled on these boards how much more "pure" your AW sounds compared to the VS, but you go and post an article complaining about how rock has become too sanitized? What gives? Eric Vincent (ASCAP) www.curvedominant.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHAN Posted March 30, 2001 Share Posted March 30, 2001 Lee, just remember, if you come at me I'll have a golf club in my hand for defence... http://cwm.ragesofsanity.com/s/cwm/freak7.gif So Many Drummers. So Little Time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Sayers Posted March 30, 2001 Share Posted March 30, 2001 I was editing, comping vocals, making guitar solos out of 40 takes etc way before digital came along. Digital just makes it easier. In the 70s I re-recorded a whole live album in the studio. A great aussie session drummer remarked to me recently that he finds doing sessions tedious now as he plays a verse and a chorus and they send him home. Yet I remember my daughter once telling me that they had an exercise at school where the teacher played a recording and they had to work out what instruments were on it. "Gee it was hard" she said. "I'd never looked at it like that, I think I got some of them" I doubt therefore that she would have heard the edits! http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/wink.gif cheers JOhn Studio Design Forum Studios Under Construction Home Page Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rader Ranch Posted March 30, 2001 Share Posted March 30, 2001 a nice cathartic, fun read....thanx for the link... keep in mind that this type of article coulda been (and probably was) written (with diff. ex.'s of course) during the proliferation of multi-tracking, the explosion of MIDI etc...one could also have written about the evils of the recording industry and it's creativity-crushing effects in any decade since the 20's i think...and perhaps the general banalaties of 'pop' as well... ...and i'm sure happy he mentioned Queens of the Stone Age in a positive light! i like that one.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHAN Posted March 30, 2001 Share Posted March 30, 2001 Originally posted by Craig Anderton: >>>As soon as musicians had multitrack tape, they were comping solos together from bits and pieces, erasing over segments to correct one wrong note, etc. ==================== The key word here is "Musician" Now we just replace "Musician" with "Engineer". So Many Drummers. So Little Time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Throatsinger Posted March 30, 2001 Share Posted March 30, 2001 Heh. Sure, some of the tech-y stuff in that article isn't right. But, that's how I feel about lotsa "music" these days. And I have no punk history or ethic. But I suspect that so much of what folks hear now, and say "that sounds good" really refers to shiny production, not communication, feeling, emotion, creation, melody, harmony, cool organic tones, etc. In other words, missing the things that I look for in music. But, I'm weird. I never drink nutritionally-devoid chemical beverages, I never eat at McDonalds, etc, or listen to mainstream radio, if I can help it. Yes, you can polish a turd. And sell it, too! Steve Sklar/Big Sky Steve Sklar http://khoomei.com http://www.bigskyrocks.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David R. Posted March 30, 2001 Share Posted March 30, 2001 Good article, a little heavy on the digital-is-evil side. Things have changed, so we learn to live with these changes. There are other quotes that can sum up a decade of banter besides ones from Sammy Hagar. And having quotes from such a middle of the road thinker as Rollins http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/wink.gif throughout, sets a certain tone. Good reading, a worthwhile distraction. -David R. -David R. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Flier Posted March 30, 2001 Author Share Posted March 30, 2001 Curve, There are a lot of individual points in the article I didn't agree with, including the one about Dave Grohl, whom I love also, and furthermore I dug the Foo Fighters record AND Nevermind, so whatever. I don't have to agree with everything somebody says, to appreciate 'em. I think the writer is referring to a very specific type of abuse of technology in the article in a very specific genre, though. He makes it pretty clear that his points don't apply to electronic music, et al. Rather, they apply to rock bands who have a certain visceral excitement on stage, and probably were signed because of that. If what you are all about is a BAND vibe, and then you go into the studio and you aren't even a band anymore, you're just playing separately, programming parts, etc., then you have SERIOUSLY lost not only credibility but excitement. And no, I don't blame the tools, as I mentioned above - I blame the egos of the producers and engineers who think this sanitized crap is a great thing. And yeah, corporate sponsorship and radio ads have a lot to do with it too. I think the moral of the story is: go with what brung you to the dance. Be who you are. If you're all about loops and samples, have at it! If you made your mark by playing raw, visceral rock that might be a little out of control and out of tune, to compromise that and go for a "perfect" recording is lame, to say the least. --Lee This message has been edited by Lee Flier on 03-29-2001 at 05:41 PM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curve Dominant Posted March 30, 2001 Share Posted March 30, 2001 Point well taken, Lee. Eric Vincent (ASCAP) www.curvedominant.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 30, 2001 Share Posted March 30, 2001 >>>I think the moral of the story is: go with what brung you to the dance. Be who you are. If you're all about loops and samples, have at it! If you made your mark by playing raw, visceral rock that might be a little out of control and out of tune, to compromise that and go for a "perfect" recording is lame, to say the least.<<< The above is about the feeling I came away from the article, a very well worded summary on Lee's part. I've been running into a lot of this type of "the musical world as we know it is coming to an end" articles. If you get past two humps: 1. Yes... the big money in music and the people that have chosen to earn they're living working for them, are turning the industry into some sort of assembly - line art manufacturing comunity. 2. And a lot of people, sometimes myself included (I'm getting old), are looking backwards instead of forwards, remebering the good ole days.... The stark reality is there's gonna a new kind of musical artist. We all might not be good at it yet but some will fall thru the cracks and prove to be exceptional. Not only in electronica in the pure sense, but in any type of music. I truly believe that or else I'd be sittin over there in my chair next to the wife starin mindlessly at the TV http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/wink.gif. ------------------ William F. Turner Guitarist, Composer, Songwriter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr. rob Posted March 30, 2001 Share Posted March 30, 2001 Well, I think if you occasionally turn on your radio or mtv you have to say what the f*ck is this crappy sh*t.!!!! I think the articles rock and roll tint, and that shot at Lenny Kravitz kind of took away from its otherwise dead on the smacker analyses.It did put too much blame on compters and not enough on the business. I think that the real problem is the business, that artists are more than ever pushed out of the mainstream. Theres as much talent today as ever. But it really saddens me that our Jimi Hendrix or Duke Ellington is either Very Obscure, or by the tremendous pressure placed upon him is wretchedly commercial. It seems theres not much place for music with any progressive values on the airwaves that are all owned by 5 conpanies. To me thats whats the big issue. Contemporary talents must choose to either play ball or be neglected. Those that play ball seem to have their work diluted to the point that its less than great. It becomes disposable. That nice middle ground is gone. Most good music comes from artists that DEFINE genre's as opposed to mindlessly produce product. To define a genre there must be a fusion. In the world of pop this is not happening in a sincere manner at all it seems. Theres not that nice middle where you can be listenable and progressive, reaching a big audience except in rare instances. This message has been edited by mr. rob on 03-29-2001 at 07:21 PM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BK_dup2 Posted March 30, 2001 Share Posted March 30, 2001 Can anyone say genetic engineering! Spooky - no doubt that the medical field will mirror the music industry. BK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tedster Posted March 30, 2001 Share Posted March 30, 2001 >>>Yo!! Charlie is DA MAN!! You diss Charlie, you PAY!! Just wondering, how come Charlie has the unusual habit of skipping the eighth note hi-hat on the snare hits? I'm not saying it's bad, it's Charlie, and it's unusual. Curve...it's sorta the advertisers with balls in hand, but more, the SALESMEN...the corporations that do this shitassed "market research" that tells them "YOU, LISTENER MORON, DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU WANT. WE DO. WE WILL PROGRAM PHIL COLLINS FIVE TIMES AN HOUR (or Boston) BECAUSE YOU LIKE IT!"....you say "No I don..." "YES YOU DO...WE HAVE STUDIES"... The masses are asses, and radio panders to 'em. And the salesmen convince the advertisers to advertise on their corporately owned stations. It's all about the Benjamins. But the advertisers are sheep, too. Show 'em a return and they'll follow you so close their noses will be brown for years. "Cisco Kid, was a friend of mine" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 30, 2001 Share Posted March 30, 2001 My day job at the moment is working nights at a radio station. It is fascinating to me. The format is "old school, dance, and R&B" supposedly, which means I might get George Clinton, or I might get Debbie Gibson. The 80's are the new 70's and so just like the revitalization of Disco now we get the revitalization of ... well 80's Disco. All the advertising is pretty much on top of "music beds" written by other people at their day jobs. Nothing is done unless it generates advertising $$. The way to get more $$ is to show that more people listen to your station. The way you do that is YOU SURVEY!!! The questions are hysterical - "Are you excited by, interested by, unaffected by, bored by or sickened by Madonna's song Like A Virgin?" "Would this song make you change the station?" ETC.etc... So in a sense, the radio plays what the people want - and the same 8 song rotation over and over gets higher ratings! Then the new listeners (ie younger) have no variety, so they don't expect any. Thank the heavens for college radio - the last place you have any chance of hearing a local band (unsigned). Its too risky. If your ratings drop, you lose $$ on every single SECOND of advertising = viable or not. Finally (sorry I could talk for days) - now one company can legally own more than one radio station - EVEN IN THE SAME TOWN! So same format from the Emerald City to the Florida Keys. AHHHHHHhhhhhh! Julian M Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the stranger Posted March 30, 2001 Share Posted March 30, 2001 It seems theres not much place for music with any progressive values on the airwaves that are all owned by 5 conpanies. To me thats whats the big issue. From what I understand, it's 9 companies (All major media outlets-tv, radio, print, etc). This is the real deal, too. Scary, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tedster Posted March 30, 2001 Share Posted March 30, 2001 Well, Julian and Dr. There are still a few independently owned radio stations...with names like KORN AM in Bufu Iowa...but, mostly, it's the corporations that own everything. That's one of the reasons why you'll hear the same station in several different cities...oh, the call letters are different, but it's the same station. "Cisco Kid, was a friend of mine" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Flier Posted March 30, 2001 Author Share Posted March 30, 2001 Originally posted by Tedster: Just wondering, how come Charlie has the unusual habit of skipping the eighth note hi-hat on the snare hits? I'm not saying it's bad, it's Charlie, and it's unusual. Well, way I've always understood it, it's because he often likes to bring out the clean tone of the snare, really make it stand out, as opposed to the snare "adulterated" by the hi-hat. Stan Lynch often cops this technique from him and Stan says that's why HE does it, too. I think there's a thread about drummers on David Frangioni's forum, where we went into quite a bit of detail about drummers' dynamics and how that can really make or break a recording, and that technique of Charlie's was mentioned. Oh yeah, here's the thread: http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/Forum17/HTML/000361.html Lot of cool comments here.... totally agree with you guys about the bidness being the bad guy. I guess the good news is that there are a lot of good folks who are continuing to do what they do even if they have to do it for free. They just want good music to be heard by somebody. The bad news of course is that it's so hard to make a living doing music you love unless you happen to love something that's on the charts right now - which, if you're a rock fan, you probably don't find much to love! --Lee This message has been edited by Lee Flier on 03-30-2001 at 09:23 AM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staupephotmail.com Posted March 30, 2001 Share Posted March 30, 2001 I am all for change. Lenny Kravatiz dumps pure analog for digital...cool! Sting starts using loops and computers...great! I don't get why we, musicians included, insist that our heros never change? I get the impression many of you would be happy if Sting just kept playing Police covers. Give him a break please!!! These guys have to move on for pete's sake. Music styles get boring to most folks after a few years(after we are force fed till sick, granted) and the music business is a lot smarter than most musicians in that regard. Computer generated stuff sounds different than "real" music, but a lot of people like it. I like it too. I am finding some new inspiration these days because of loops and cut and paste. Don't worry, we will be back to acoustic analog stuff soon enough, but not until after the record companies squeeze every last bit of blood out of the computer/musician/geeks. Eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.