PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com

you know, I'm kind of going through a phase I think. A serious one. It starts off like this: Styles are a set of sonic rules. You learn it, abide by it, and break some if you want, but basically you stay within the vacinity. After a while, you either chunk up, or chunk down, meaning you either dig into discerning detail, or work towards the general, accepting more things.

Well I tend to chunk up very fast. I guess I like to find similarities and group things together, instead of finding differences and grouping things apart. It's like the cup is half full concept. I guess it's an attitude, or philosophy. But this is causing problem for me, this chunking up thing.. because I think that's precisely what's causing me to shift between styles and not valueing the extreme details.

Like I don't usually value a certain style over another. I don't think the minute differences that define a style is too important. Especially if it's not sonically present, or something very vague. Like "it's a way of life", or "a state of the spirit" or some PR crap like that that musicians say so it looks good on magazine. I don't buy into that crap.

I dunno, I just don't think that the world is going to pivot around whether this specific synth line sounds like this or that. Does that make a difference? It's like, " one huge step for a very specific group of people maybe, but NOTHING, for mankind". Is it worth the trouble then? Not that I want to be Ghandi, but wouldn't it be better to spend my time atleast making some real world difference?

But then, is that what music has come down to? Coping with man build barriers between genres, mental blocks, even cultural walls. A question of gaining enough credibility to start making your own calls? This layer of symbolic consumption always makes me sick in the stomach. The symbolic layer has become so powerful, that the layer beneath, the layer that speaks the writer's mind has become almost non-existant.

Is this something I want to keep on doing? Do I want to learn one song, and write the same song over and over with minute variations? Should music be that way? I'm not sure anymore because basically, it's not very interesting. Do I want to produce say, 10 deep house tracks in 15 days? I maybe able to, but that would suck! Maybe I get sick of my own music too fast. 2 tracks of a specific style in a row is okay. 4-5 I start to get sick. And then the problem is, I need to be able to pump out same sounding, consistent results for my work to be of commercial value. Makes sense in business terms.. But as a creative thinker, that's like a coffin.

I dunno.. I think it's a phase. And I need to kick myself into focus. Thoughts? Comments?

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: kensuguro on 2005-11-27 08:20 ]</font>

Hi Ken, I don't know if I've locked the throuble, but a suggestion I can give to you is:
try to watch inside you and ask yourself why do you write music and the meaning you give to music and to music writing. Try to put on a balance what you give to music and what music gives to you. Try to forget the money (if possible) and let's talk your soul.
Maybe you are still searching for your identity (musically speaking); and/or maybe you have that identity inside you but you haven't focused it yet, so you can recognize fragments of it in various genres, but there's not any genre that match exacly your mind and this gets you sick.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Lima on 2005-11-27 09:46 ]</font>

and/or maybe you have that identity inside you but you haven't focused it yet, so you can recognize fragments of it in various genres, but there's not any genre that match exacly your mind and this gets you sick.

that's an interesting viewpoint. Yeah, I can recognize fragments of it an a bunch of genres. Or more like, I can put fragments of my identity in all of the styles I work in.

That's what's confusing. There are some that obviously dont' work with me, so that's a saver. But the many that do work, work almost equally well. okay, I tend to stick towards the dance/percussive end of the spectrum, but that's pretty much the only restriction. Everything within that restriction works just about equally well.

So again, that's where I need to start narrowing down I guess. And then there's that equal force saying I shouldn't narrow down because then I'd be doing routine stuff over and over again. Arrggghhh!!

I think I see two layers in music. There's the physical sound, and then there's "how it got there".. kind of like CSI I guess. (lol) There's the crime scene, and then how it happened. Well, I really like to "read" the sound and see if I can figure out what was going on in the writer's mind. When I can read it, and it's sophisticated beyond a certain point, I like it. Be it salsa or heavy metal.

If the sound only reads "hell, I threw it out without using my brain", I hate it. So, maybe that's the part of music that I value alot.. the "how it got there". The imprinted state of the writer's mind. The whole phenomenon of that transfer of information happening. The sonic result pretty much just follows, as a byproduct. Sot that may be why I don't value the details.

It's interesting tho, thinking about this problem. The thinking and wandering itself helps define my identity, so it's good.

Most people discover music when they are teenagers and then listen to the same music over and over again for the rest of their lives. Speaking of style when can I stop hearing the Christmas music from the 50's and 60's? I want to puke! Music should change. Genres are bad. People just copy what went before. It's easy that way. We would like to think that making quality music is important yet we want people to listen to our music but if it's good and original nobody will like it as people like what they heard before and mostly they like to listen to crap.

Do like me Ken. Write a Country and Western tune, WITH steel-pedal guitars and violin in the orchestration. Concentrate on the articulation of each note. Study the way the piano is played and mimic it as well as you can.

Then go back to an idea that's more comfortable for you.

The idea is to study unlikely styles so you can apply the trick therein and clear your mind in the process.

You don't have to write a C&W tune, it was just an example

Great idea. Twist it when you are done.

oh man.. that would kill me. lol.

I reckon 95% of what most of us do is to earn a living. The rest is a bonus. Doesn't seem to matter if we're journalists or songwriters. Maybe share market traders needn't apply. Also, it seems the hardest thing to achieve in life is balance. Go figure. I think these points also apply to music.

There's other ways of looking at this Ken. For example, many of the worlds' top electronic producers have done exactly what's leeding you to question yourself. (and music) They have either deliberately or by the shear chance of walking a winding path, learned all or most of the basic concepts involved in making a multitude of musical styles, attending to the 'decerning details' where they deemed appropriate. This journey for many is like a self-taught masterclass in the history & construction of electronic music. It's a positive journey which will lead to you having a thorough understanding of various styles & genres from which you can start picking your favourite elements, expanding or contracting them into your own style.

At the end of the day most peoples' concsiousness of music is derived from music they've already heard. It's that obscure memory based catalogue, which so often leads to extreme familiarity when listening to new music. The same is true for many many Artforms.

catagories are needed because of the way music is sold and it's alittle out of control. anyone who says that sales don't matter is a teenager or lying, unfortunately. a musician must eat. EVERY form is a formula(form=FORMula, get it?), so don't worry and do what you like. when you are commissioned to do music(someone else pays), the formula is your friend. when you do it for yourself, the formula can be a measuring stick. there's no need to hate everything in a form. it exists because in some way it speaks to people. you need to find the beauty in it and then let it be. enjoy it. when you actually have something new, use it if you like. please don't just be a hater off-hand based on your perception of cool(if you can help it...).

well, you're right gary, categories are needed. I don't hate the categories and the distinctions between forms.. I guess it's when a form definition is used in a fake way, things kind of get messed up.. like I can say this music is "A form". If for some reason I have the credentials and credibility, then "A form" becomes my form. I can say what goes in, and what doesn't. This is okay, if "A form" is really something new, or something that can be distinguished from the rest.

Problem is, I think many people take advantage of their credibility and make "A form".. maybe striving for something new at first, but later becoming lazy in its implementation. Then, "A form" can only be distinguished by its maker, who will have a hard time pointing out physical characteristics because the form is not fully implemented anyway, or was not discernable in the first place. Then it's usually the "well, A form is actually a lifestyle, an attitudes towards life.. and death.. and some other stuff... ya know".

Really screws up why we have categories in the first place. When you get too many "A forms", then the whole system of categorization will become obsolete.

ah well, I'm just having a fit.. I'll get over it.

i hear you....

Ken, read Brian Eno's Oblique Strategies

http://music.hyperreal.org/artists/bria ... lique.html

I love that random card thing

_________________
Are we listening?..

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: paulrmartin on 2005-11-30 03:48 ]</font>

I think it's cool to work within a realist framework - but if you value your music's integrity, remember a few things so that you can make it catchy and compulsive to listen to, while not being cheesy and wack:

1. write things with emotional meaning.. not just self-indulgent things which make you feel satisfied, but try to inspire a reaction in the listener - something arresting and dynamic. Make it tell a story, make it flow in an organic way that connects with people and doesn't just repeat the same thing over and over.

2. keep an original spirit.. there's no point (except financial maybe ) in stating the obvious. Say something different and something worth saying which hasn't been said in the same way before.

I guess that's just me though, I want to make stuff that someone can't argue with in terms of accessibility (catchiness ), but still makes them sit back and reconsider things based on what the music gives them.

Or something. Pardon my intoxicated ramblings... hopefully this stuff might be useful to someone

Oh and I forgot one thing.. respect your musical heritage - by that the people who developed the music that you make now - so if you make hip-hop, pay attention to (but don't ape) the music that influenced it, like blues, jazz, soul and funk, and everything that influenced those forms too...

If people had more respect for the musicians of the past, and why those guys made that music, then maybe we wouldn't have all the bullshit meaningless music we see clogging up the market today.

By the way, one should reflect on "exactly WHO needs" categories.

Is it really the composer or the audience(95% of the latter is tone deaf)?

As opposed to the staggering figure of 93% of composers who are also tone deaf

err.... "WHAT DID YOU SAY?"

ZER, I CAN'T HEAR YOU FOR ALL THE SHOUTING