this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2024
250 points (98.8% liked)
Asklemmy
43336 readers
835 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Synthesizers and music technology in general.
I could write an essay or two about how much has changed in the past fifty years. Most of it for the better.
The level the "hobbyist" music producer can reach now days is mind boggling with the free software they can get on their phones and pcs.
According to Rick Beato on YouTube this is why music is shit nowadays. He's got real "old man yells at cloud" energy and he's fucking wrong. The fact that someone can make music easily means that there is tons of great music being produced because the barriers to entry are not prohibitive anymore.
Something being accessible usually means that the results have a lower low-end and higher high-end, no? In the context of music, it would mean that there are bigger heaps of trash with a few hidden gems
He's especially wrong because music is shit EVERYDAY we just have the privilege of looking back on decades of music we can sift through.
For every Led Zeppelin there are 50 Whingers. We just don't remember them because they are lost to time.
Anyone who claims 'music today sucks' will change their tune in 10 years when the real classics of today are remembered.
The music equivalent of 'everyone has a novel in them, and god willing that's where most of them will stay.'
Haha yeah we have seen some wonderful singers come out of nowhere with fully produced songs.
Yes there are a lot of people who are having fun, but people producing songs for fun doesn't make songs you enjoy worst. It's amazing that someone can from the comfort of their home and stuff off amazon they can produce a song in about 6 months with equipment/software that would require a studio 20ish years ago. Also probably never been more satisfying to produce a song. Even if it's not "Great" it still adds to the joy of music.
I imagine you missed the nuances of what he describes as the human elements of music. Humans fluctuate tempo. Humans can play music with other humans impromptu based on common repertoire or musical templates, themes, and styles. Humans can call and response based on riffs or quotes. Music and dance are quite literally on the few cultural pillars of humanity across all cultures and time for its social uses. Often, all this music software is used in solitude, never to be utilized in a social way. New music tech and music instruments are just tools. It is about how one uses them.
Beethoven composed in solitude, too.
Yes, there's something about a live performance that can't exactly be reproduced jamming with yourself in your bedroom, but that doesn't mean that great music can't come out of both processes.
Beato is definitely channeling a little "git offa mah lawwn!" vibes. The reason we don't get any more Led Zeppelins or Pink Floyds or whichever brand of classic rock he worships at the altar of isn't because there aren't talented musicians making music. It's because the circumstances that those artists thrived under no longer exist, and likely never will again.