|
|
Laserbeak
from Netherlands, The on 2002-05-30 18:47 [#00242931]
Points: 2670 Status: Lurker
|
|
What do you think of the gap between the level of amatures and professional musicmakers? Do you still think there's still much difference? And what do you think will happen with this gap in the future?
|
|
Amonbrune
from Vancouver (Canada) on 2002-05-30 18:51 [#00242936]
Points: 7327 Status: Addict
|
|
This gap will always give way to the pros. Say in like 15 years, the gap will have gone on pretty much to professionals. And then during their time there will be another gap. I think it will go on and on...always giving way to professionals...and learning.
|
|
cygnus
from nowhere and everyplace on 2002-05-30 18:52 [#00242940]
Points: 11920 Status: Regular
|
|
this can't really apply to a music genre where an artist can release a track they made when they were like 9 messing around with a keyboard they found in a junkyard
|
|
Amonbrune
from Vancouver (Canada) on 2002-05-30 18:53 [#00242941]
Points: 7327 Status: Addict
|
|
I bet they could if they used their new knowledge and screwed up past stuff. I think that would be a very interesting conceptual peice for a cd.
|
|
Co-existence
from Bergen (Norway) on 2002-05-30 19:00 [#00242944]
Points: 3388 Status: Regular
|
|
So how to define "professional musician"? Record contract? Living off what one makes of the music? Hey, I'm confused here?!?
|
|
Laserbeak
from Netherlands, The on 2002-05-30 19:04 [#00242946]
Points: 2670 Status: Lurker | Followup to Co-existence: #00242944
|
|
Professional = someone who makes money out of what they're doing(music)
Amature = someone who makes music for fun and doesn't get payed for it(puts it for free on the internet)
|
|
DirtyPriest
from Copenhagen (Denmark) on 2002-05-30 19:06 [#00242949]
Points: 5499 Status: Lurker
|
|
Discipline and practise.
|
|
marlowe
from Antarctica on 2002-05-30 19:08 [#00242950]
Points: 24578 Status: Lurker
|
|
which made van gogh an amateur painter - shows the inanity of having such distinctions -
|
|
Laserbeak
from Netherlands, The on 2002-05-30 19:16 [#00242955]
Points: 2670 Status: Lurker | Followup to marlowe: #00242950
|
|
But what about the technological aspect? In the old days only professionals could afford a synth. Amatures didn't have as much freedom as they have now...
|
|
cygnus
from nowhere and everyplace on 2002-05-30 19:22 [#00242966]
Points: 11920 Status: Regular | Followup to Laserbeak: #00242955
|
|
that's why the gap between amateur and pro is getting smaller. it's becoming easier to duplicate the music you listen to.
|
|
marlowe
from Antarctica on 2002-05-30 19:35 [#00242975]
Points: 24578 Status: Lurker
|
|
i didn't realise beethoven used a synthesizer
|
|
marlowe
from Antarctica on 2002-05-30 19:36 [#00242976]
Points: 24578 Status: Lurker
|
|
if the distinction between an amateur and a professional is whether an A'n'R man decides you're marketable, then it ain't a distinction i'm willing to recognise
|
|
cygnus
from nowhere and everyplace on 2002-05-30 19:40 [#00242980]
Points: 11920 Status: Regular
|
|
well said, marlowe!
|
|
Amonbrune
from Vancouver (Canada) on 2002-05-30 19:52 [#00242985]
Points: 7327 Status: Addict
|
|
Marlowe: I would consider van gogh a professional.
|
|
Amonbrune
from Vancouver (Canada) on 2002-05-30 19:54 [#00242987]
Points: 7327 Status: Addict
|
|
Professional = someone who has mastered their art and can without any help realize their vision or what they want to acheive efficiently and effectivly.
|
|
Amonbrune
from Vancouver (Canada) on 2002-05-30 19:55 [#00242988]
Points: 7327 Status: Addict
|
|
and also get paid for it
|
|
marlowe
from Antarctica on 2002-05-30 20:04 [#00242997]
Points: 24578 Status: Lurker
|
|
well, van gogh never got paid for his art, so he wasn't technically a professional - i am not disagreeing with you that he was a master-- he's one of my favourite artists --- personally, i think the term professional is putrid and comes with a nasty stigma -- reminds me of white shirts, arrogant personalities, and a sociopathic obsession with money -- but that's just me i guess
|
|
Monoid
from one source all things depend on 2002-05-30 20:54 [#00243064]
Points: 11005 Status: Regular
|
|
Well well, you have to have a good understanding of the technology first, and of course talent, theres lots of shitty electronic music out there especially on those MP3 PORTALS.
|
|
marlowe
from Antarctica on 2002-05-30 21:01 [#00243071]
Points: 24578 Status: Lurker | Followup to Monoid: #00243064
|
|
monoid - you are narrowing the definition of music-maker there, are you not? not all music-makers make electronic music, shocking as that may seem...
and whats this about talent? i would say there were 'professionals' with little talent, and 'amateurs' with immense talent - so i believe talent should not be included in the comparison....
|
|
nanotech
from Sukavasti Amitaba Pureland (United States) on 2002-05-30 21:03 [#00243072]
Points: 3727 Status: Regular
|
|
heh, the gap between pro's and amatures is mu-ziq records...almost all the stuff on that label falls into this void.
|
|
license
from out of nowhere on 2002-05-30 21:08 [#00243075]
Points: 865 Status: Lurker
|
|
I think what we're talking about is rather the distinction between the "dilettante" and the "master".
I don't consider money in my evaluation of art or the artist that create it.
then again, I think that we have a tendency to polarise - these are two extremes, and it's easy (and quite dangerous) to fall into black and white thinking.
most of the artists I enjoy I consider neither dilletantes or masters, just artists.
it's all about art to me.
|
|
Laserbeak
from Netherlands, The on 2002-05-30 21:21 [#00243099]
Points: 2670 Status: Lurker
|
|
Shit I wrote amateurs as amatures sorry for that And I don't mean anything negative by the word "gap". "gap" is the only the general difference. What it was, what it is now and what it will be...
something to add: amateurs have more room for experimentation since they can afford to take risks.
|
|
w M w
from London (United Kingdom) on 2002-05-30 21:41 [#00243141]
Points: 21423 Status: Regular
|
|
computers are getting better at doing what they do, it would be very hard to create autechre tracks in the days of kings quest 1.
|
|
marlowe
from Antarctica on 2002-05-30 21:52 [#00243174]
Points: 24578 Status: Lurker | Followup to w M w: #00243141
|
|
no shit
|
|
ouchbot
on 2002-05-30 22:01 [#00243197]
Points: 91 Status: Regular
|
|
The Gaps shrinking. Some experimental amatuers are making better music than experimental PROFESSIONALS. Mainly because professionals think in terms in terms of machines that cost thousands, while amateurs hunt and scour and investigate and use anything they can lay their hands on. There's some amazing VST plugin out for free that would be too beneath the professional, and they they sometimes surpass the lates whizbang tool, in extracting strange , beautiful and complex tones out of the computers.
Most amateur pop and hiphopsters are making better music than TOP40 shit.
|
|
license
from out of nowhere on 2002-05-31 01:46 [#00243429]
Points: 865 Status: Lurker
|
|
in my opinion, it's more about taste than skill anymore.
|
|
JivverDicker
from my house on 2002-05-31 03:10 [#00243486]
Points: 12102 Status: Regular | Followup to license: #00243429
|
|
Exactly, anyone can replicate Ae or Aphex templates, especially with software that is made to emulate their 'sound'. Why people are 'sucessfull' is because they do what they feel, Confield is brave, whether you think it is shit or not. Make music for youself, copying is good to learn technique but please don't ask for praise.....
|
|
Messageboard index
|