Programming vs. Playing and what is Felt

[tocsin]

Figured this might deserve it's own topic and I'll start it here.

This is an old and frankly quite pathetic argument, of Electronic Composition versus Real instruments, and not
something I would expect from a forum like this.
I can play the guitar, the drums, the piano, bass guitar, and a bit of flute.
It`s a mechanical skill. Anyone can learn it.
The same as programming is a mechanical skill.
The talent lies in the musical ability.
To think you can just randomly bash away at a computer and come up with a good tune is so naieve.
there is a certian subset of musicians who for reasons unknown adhere to the false premise that "electronic" music
or the tools involved imply a lack of creativity of inspired performance. Technology in the hands of creative,
intelligent individuals is a tool for art, not a hindrance.
Couldnt have said better myself
no you couldnt really could you.
neither could i.

I'm not discussing randomly bashing keys here. Let me put this in context.

You're at a club. Nobody is really dancing to the music and you aren't really feeling it. If and when that comes up in discussion, you get a number of chinstrokers who start talking about inferior "dance music" while discussing what makes the music you didn't feel so amazing and ground breaking. But, in the end, it's still a 4/4 track with compressed kicks and some effects tricks being the heart of technical "skill" in that track. This is something that anyone, and I mean ANYONE, can do after shelling out some bucks to take a course on basic audio engineering if one can't figure it out themselves. Is it a skill? Absolutely. Is it enough to really impress me? No. When it comes to any programmed machine that makes music, if the music itself doesn't move me, no arguments about the cool use of effects, EQ, whatever is going to make me appreciate it any much more. It will still be something that leaves me cold. When the "groundbreaking" aspect is from someone who learned how, or stumbled upon, the
positioning of some knobs or sliders in various places, I just don't see what the big deal is.

Now, compare that to a live musician. After 3 months of practice on any instrument, you aren't going to be that good unless you are a gifted prodigy. It takes more time and dedication to be able to master many musical instruments to a professional level. It's something that takes years of discipline.
In the end, if I'm not feeling the music such a musician is playing, it's still not going to be my cup of tea. But, when a chinstroker discussion comes up around it, I can respect it more. There is a huge difference between playing an instrument and programming one. Arguments that try and separate programmed music as being technically better than other programmed music that sounds almost exactly the same, in the end, is just bogus for me. Frankly, I think the whole superiority arguments surrounding musical genres helped make a number of them so weak. I've more appreciation for someone who focusses on the energy. When a track with good energy is mastered well, that's great. When a boring track is mastered well, it's still boring. And, of course, boring or even "mastered well" is entirely subjective.

[dirty_bass]

See, your lack of experience is showing here.
Music is music, regardless of the medium.
Badly made loopy techno is just that, unchallenging and non musical.
Nothing to do with the equipment.
Boring, regurgitated punk played by all these punk bands popping up today is just the same. Unchallenging and non musical.

I`ve lived my whole life around musicians, having been in bands and stuff for years.
I know many technically accomplished guitarists etc, who can play really well, especially if it is from score, but when it comes to writing their own shit, they suck.

I picked up guitar real quick. It just takes practice, day after day, so your fingers MECHANICALLY learn where to go, automatically.
It doesn`t take years of discipline at all.
I would say you can learn guitar a lot quicker than you could learn to fully master say, cubase.
If you are musically talented, then you will be good with guitar, it just takes time to mechanically learn.
If you are musically talented then you will be good with a sequencing set up, it just takes time to learn the gear.

It`s all about translating what you have in your head, into something that moves air.

The fact is, their isn`t a huge difference between playing an instrument and programming one.
Creativity is not medium dependant.
If you write shit on a PC, you are gonna write shit on a piano.
Talent is talent regardless of the medium, and this argument is based on nothing more than opinion.

[Jimfish]

the very fact that there bare say 1000 techno producers out there and only maybe 10 are consistenly top notch prooves that not anybody can make amazing sequenced music.

Just the same as there are thousands of guitarists out there and maybe 5% of them tops are the nuts.

You have to remember that playing live and writing complete tracks are very different things. One is composition and one is performance. There are tonnes of people that are good composers but only average instrumentalists and the same goes the other way.

[Jimfish]

bare = are :lol:

[dirty_bass]

That`s what I was trying to get at, cheers Jim.
Performance and composition are two different things.

[tocsin]

See, your lack of experience is showing here.

First off, if you want to have a discussion, don't start your posts with something that will be read as an ad hominem.

My experience is what relates to my opinion. I've been doing music one way or anothr most of my life. I'm not talking about regurgitated punk bands here. Sure, anyone can learn how to play an instrument in a medicore fashion real quick and even have it sound good. I'm not discussing the subjective "good composition" either. I don't even disagree with that.

This is the point and try and stick to it without any tangents as this topic keeps walking away into different issues. Say you have a techno track that doesn't move you in the slightest. Then, say you also have a profesisonal classical guitar recording that you also don't like. You have two chin strokers in your company. One who tries to tell you that the music you enjoy (because you happen to think they are good compositions) is inferior dance music and that the particular track you don't like is excellent because of some studio technical tricks. Then, the other chin stroker repeats the inferior dance music claim while claiming the guitar track you don't like is good because the playing is exceptionally dificult.

The "inferior" claims are both bogus, obviously. But, as far as humoring a chinstroker, I'm not going to give a rat's ass about how great the use of compression, EQ, panning, whatever is thrown into the mix is because anyone with a bit of cash to spend can learn how do that shit on a professional level in a short period of time. Now, as for the chinstroker argument about the exceptional guitar playing, that is something that will impress me as it is a much more refined skill. Moreover, that chinstroker is unlikely to tell me how phenomenal the work is because of the way the bass notes stick out over the lower mids.

Anyone who has the time and isn't deaf can learn the techniques which are brought up as being so superior by chinstroking genre snobs. Not everyone who has the time will become a virtuoso on an instrument. Far less of you would. Now, is that an insult? Or is it just recognition of the fact that, where machines and technology that were created to make tasks easier are used in the production of music and are constantly evolving, that maybe using them in a professional setting and having them sound quite good isn't quite as difficult as learning how to get the same sound out of something without any help from a mahcine at all?

[Jimfish]

if we havent adressed your point then i really cant understand what your point actually is..

[dirty_bass]

Thats where you are wrong.
Anyone can learn to play an instrument to a high standard.
It`s a mechanical skill.
As I have said, living around the muso life all my life, I`ve seen plenty of people say, I`m gonna take up guitar.
And within a year, they are finger tapping as good as steve vai.
No different from spending a year learning in the studio how to produce properly.
Your argument doesn`t hold up, and is based on a very old fashioned mind set.

When I wanted to learn piano, I paid to have lessons. I had a good teacher.
I reached a high standard.

How is that different to someone doing the same for studio?

I don`t understand your point at all.

[tocsin]

Yes, you just don't understand my point as I'm having trouble communicating it here. The joy of digital communication. Anyways, let's seriously not pretend that anyone can practice guitar for a year and become a virtuoso. Let's not pretend that it is nearly as simple as learning how to make a recording sound technically good through the use of machines. I'll happilly take a 909 and a 303 recorded on a dirty tape deck over something that I just find boring. Now, given that this doesn't seem to happen too much anymore for records that come out, when all someone can do to explain to me why one track is "better" than another is because some studio tricks were used, which can be implemented by reading how other people did and buying the right equipment, I'm simply not impressed. It's a chinstroker argument that I will not accept. When it comes to the music snobs who aren't focussing on audio engineering and focus on the exceptional playing of an instrument instead, even if I don't like the music I can
appreciate the playing. It's a skill that requires just a bit more than cash and access to technology. What I enjoy about techno so much is how simple it is to produce incredible sounding results with very little investment especially if you are willing to experiment with what you have in front of you. If you've got lots of money to blow, you could even make it easier for yourself by not having to use daisy-chained DIY approaches. Then, it's as simple as grabbing a book or jumping on the net, reading some basics, and taking some notes about the settings you like on your recording. You can make it unbelievably methodical if you so choose and merely tweak some parameters here and there where need be. This is something that can be learned in a 3 month crash course. Thus, I'm really not all that impressed by it. With machines, everyone has the power to make their composition come out sounding exactly how they want it to sound. The largest hurdles are pretty much coneptualization and lingo. That is
something that is completely different than learning to play scales on a sitar in a 39/32 time sig at a fast tempo and have it sound good. It may sound like shit to me from a subjective standpoint in the end. But, to get to the level of being able to do it requires far more effort and work than learning how to get the best EQ and compression out of your drum kick in a techno track that was able to be recorded without even having to use a microphone. In the end, the technology that exists makes it possible for much more people to become gifted audio engineers than musical prodigies on an instrument. And that is because the machine does more of the work than the person.

[Mindful]

For some people me being one of them the production of a track can move me as much as a good piece of music.
In other words one of the things that I personaly look for in music is the technical thought and skill that has gone in to it.
It may be easy to program a machine to play a genaral track but to do it in a way that is proffessinal and true is not so easy,if it was then I would not enjoy it as much as I do.I have been doing it for what feels like forever but still am nowhere near the level I wish to get to,I maybe able to make a fairly good piece of music but but its the technical side that takes somthing extra to achive and I do not feel happy with meerley a good track for me it has to be well produced.

My two cents on the matter ;)

[dirty_bass]

Yes, you just don't understand my point as I'm having trouble communicating it here. The joy of digital communication. Anyways, let's seriously not pretend that anyone can practice guitar for a year and become a virtuoso. Let's not pretend that it is nearly as simple as learning how to make a recording sound technically good through the use of machines. I'll happilly take a 909 and a 303 recorded on a dirty tape deck over something that I just find boring. Now, given that this doesn't seem to happen too much anymore for records that come out, when all someone can do to explain to me why one track is "better" than another is because some studio tricks were used, which can be implemented by reading how other people did and buying the right equipment, I'm simply not impressed. It's a chinstroker argument that I will not accept. When it comes to the music snobs who aren't focussing on audio engineering and focus on the exceptional playing of an instrument instead, even if I don't like the music I can
appreciate the playing. It's a skill that requires just a bit more than cash and access to technology. What I enjoy about techno so much is how simple it is to produce incredible sounding results with very little investment especially if you are willing to experiment with what you have in front of you. If you've got lots of money to blow, you could even make it easier for yourself by not having to use daisy-chained DIY approaches. Then, it's as simple as grabbing a book or jumping on the net, reading some basics, and taking some notes about the settings you like on your recording. You can make it unbelievably methodical if you so choose and merely tweak some parameters here and there where need be. This is something that can be learned in a 3 month crash course. Thus, I'm really not all that impressed by it. With machines, everyone has the power to make their composition come out sounding exactly how they want it to sound. The largest hurdles are pretty much coneptualization and lingo. That is
something that is completely different than learning to play scales on a sitar in a 39/32 time sig at a fast tempo and have it sound good. It may sound like shit to me from a subjective standpoint in the end. But, to get to the level of being able to do it requires far more effort and work than learning how to get the best EQ and compression out of your drum kick in a techno track that was able to be recorded without even having to use a microphone. In the end, the technology that exists makes it possible for much more people to become gifted audio engineers than musical prodigies on an instrument. And that is because the machine does more of the work than the person.

Nope your still talking arse.
Going on a production course for a year and being able to produce to a high standard doesn`t mean you will make good tunes.
Your confusing good production with good music.

And you can learn to play an instrument to a high standard very quickly, if you have the time to invest. I`ve seen many people do it, and I`ve done it myself.

Your so naieve to think anyone can make good music if they use a computer.

A computer doesn`t create for you.

I know plenty of people who are accomplished engineers, who can`t make a decent composition to save their lives.

It has taken me about 5 years to get to a reasonably good level of production.
And I`m still learning.

Piano took me about 8 months to get to a stage where I could play what I wanted to play.

Guitar took about a year.

I played drums from an early age, and have taught loads of people to play. With drums it`s a matter of co-ordination. If someone is coordinated, I can get them to a high level (if they practice) in a year, no problem.

It`s all irrelevant.

Creativity is creativity.

If you seriously think the way you do, then you demean all electronic artists.

Some of the most talented musicians don`t play any conventional instruments at all.

Look at Arvo Part.

Musical talent lies within the mind, and not in a mechanical skill.

[Evil G]

i think that it's important to point out that engineering a track and arranging a track are two completely different things, but they are being conflated here. if you want to compare a recording of techno to something else, it should be a recording of something else, not the other thing live. i think it's better not talk about engineering at all, since a classical guitarist obviously is going to pay an engineer to help him record anyway...

now, as for arranging, with techno, some of the performance aspect gets transfered into the arrangement, which is different than "real" music, but nonetheless, some pieces of sequenced music will be more expressive and "musical" sounding than others, just as some performers are more expressive than others using real instruments. having played the guitar for 10 years before getting into techno, it's my opinion that to be able to get that human feel into a sequenced piece takes vastly more talent than it does when playing a real instrument (where we really can't help but play out of time to some small degree), and it has nothing to do with using the trendiest engineering tricks.

look at squarepusher. his tracks sound good even when they sound bad, because they express a feeling, and i don't think it would be unfair to call him a "virtuoso" programmer.

[holotropik]

Not too sure what you are trying to say Tocsin? I know its hard to communicate online too.

But, dont forget that what a musician hears and what a punter hears are two very different things. I have learnt to pay more attention to the punters than to other musicians due to the chin-stroke phenomenon and competitivness of the music industry. If I listened to what other musicians tell me then I would never play out Live, ever. Would never be good enough or have the right equipment.

Also, music is subject to marketing hype which often makes something shite (eg: generic manufactured Pop-music) into something awesome with just a few well arranged wordz. How many muso bios' do you read that all sound the same? (so & so has been a muso all their lives...learnt to play an instrument from 4 years old.... now they are the next big thing....blah blah blah).

The final word on a track is said by the punter who listens to it and gets a kick out of it at that particular time....the artists soul has reached into them and plucked the right strings.

[tocsin]

Going on a production course for a year and being able to produce to a high standard doesn`t mean you will make good
tunes.

This is why I asked you to try and stay on point. Where did I say that going to school would mean you would make good tunes? I've actually been trying to state the exact opposite. I'm not talking about the compositional aspects so much as the engineering aspect. Most of the techno snobs I know have never implied that it is more dificult to compose a hard techno track than it is any other style of techno. The elitism comes in on the audio engineering side (ie. EQ, compression, etc.). That is something that doesn't really impress me. The music snobs, when it also comes to a song I just might not like, will discuss the technicality and skill regarding the playing of the instrument. I'm not talking about a recording of someone who just practiced enough to learn how to play the songs they wanted either. I'm talking about mastering an instrument. You did not master the guitar or piano in 8 months to a year.

Your confusing good production with good music.

No. The people who I wouldn't humor try to convince myself and others that tracks I don't like are better than some of the inferior dance tracks I like due to the incredible production. So, basically, you may have been agreeing with me the whole time.

If you seriously think the way you do, then you demean all electronic artists.

??? Fine then, if that's how you want to read it. I don't exactly see how pointing out that technology which was specifically created with ease of use in mind is easy to use.

[tocsin]

^^^ ended sentence abruptly. Should read ... "with ease of use in mind is easy to use is somehow demeaning to anyone that uses it."

[dirty_bass]

What does "mastering" the piano or guitar involve then?
I can play anything that comes to my mind, how I want it to be played.
Is that not mastering it?

If not then what is?
Being able to play something from another planet you have no knowledge of playing?


I`m confused.

No. The people who I wouldn't humor try to convince myself and others that tracks I don't like are better than some of the inferior dance tracks I like due to the incredible production. So, basically, you may have been agreeing with me the whole time.

These people are obviously cretins.
If they are saying the production of the better produced tracks is better. Then they are correct.
However, the composition is subjective, and therefore wether it is better or not is in the ear of the beholder.

How this can be compared to someone playing alive instrument is beyond me.

I suppose you could compare the production of a, say classical recording, to an electronic trip hop recording, for example.
that would make sense.

but comapring the technical skill of say, playing stairway to heaven on the sitar, with making a techno track, is just bizarre.

[dirty_bass]

well, ok, commenting on the title of this thread, my conclusion is this.

Both electronically produced and manually played music can be equally expressive, and both can convey just as much feeling.


Neither is superior, except maybe in the eyes (ears) of a fool.

[The Divide]

Anyone who does these crash courses only learns the very basics, like reading a book on how to play a guitar. They learn nothing about discovering a way of expressing themselves musically. As a result of this the end product is either a clone or a piece of tosh. Those who master it stand above.

However

There are two very influential factors here...

1. Musical understanding

2. Technological understanding


The musician usually focuses more on the instrument and the music, the artist tends to focus more on the technology. Therefore I would say the musician tends to be better at music but limited by the instrument.

The Artist tends to focus on technology, its not as simple as learning abc of a studio and its workings. It’s about expressing yourself via the equipment thus enabling you to find your sound. As far as I can see there are less limitations to playing a studio than an instrument. The rabbit hole can be as deep as the artist wants to take it. I can say from my experience been 6 years into this and I still only feel like I have just started. However doing a degree on creative sound and music technology has enabled me to create my own reakor FX boxes which suit my own personal needs. That’s combining technical understanding and logic together to be creative.

How do you do that with a guitar? Build your own?

That doesn’t make me any better tho, I actually suck at music (chord progressions, scales, etc) but you know what. That’s not what I’m interested in and that’s why I feel we are having an argument about chalk and cheese.

[The Divide]

P.S who says techno is better than this music, that music? This just seems like narrow mindedness

It’s all the same, just air moving our ear drums and sending electrical signals to our brains which stimulate certain emotions. Any music can do this and it all depends on the head that you carry on your shoulders.

PPS Did I mention hard house sucks? :lol:

[davethedrummer]

i've been reading your posts tocsin and i think i get what you are saying
you seem to be completely objective and sitting in neither camp
i think you are just saying that you like what you like regardless of how
"clever" it is.
and if that's what you are saying then i agree.
but it is a frequent thing to hear someone say" this is better than that because it requires better technique" etc etc....
personally i try not to get to heated about technique , as someone said before some squarepusher tracks and indeed some aphex tracks sound pretty bad , but that doesn't stop them from being great.

my dad is a professional arranger , so i would say that making music on a computer is as valid as learning piano because the skills involved with the arrangement , programming , playing , mixing , are so different yet they have to be tuned into each other to get the end result.
many musicians can't do this , they can just play their instrument , which is why the session musician exsists.

learning to play an instrument is useful to programming but not as useful as learning to play with other people is to arranging .

all my family are musicians , both parents are professionals , they totally boggle when they come into my studio , and i boggle when i watch them flit around on the keyboard playing chopin when i first showed my mum the studio she said
"oh wow and you can just put the music in a loop just like that????"

we forget sometimes how much we know..... we really do

music is art , art is 99% hard work 1% talent , to quote my mother and i never thought i'd be quoting my mum.