 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 Now online (1)big ...and 285 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2614069 Today 13 Topics 127541 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
...just looking over a client's list of room booking and what's the top one on the list? "Introduction to Propellerhead's Reason". What I wouldn't have given to of had that as a class when I was a nipper. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
It would have had to be Introduction to SoundTracker and NoiseTracker. With later courses on OctaMed and the Paula chipset. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I suppose for me it would have been "Introduction to Re-Birth". Still, that's a Propellerheads program too. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
we use cubase at work (school). I also teach photoshop, 3-D design and computer animation. Teachers have just recently (as in this year) been given far more creativity and scope with which to choose topics to teach students. It's a lot less linear, but that could be shit for students who have teachers with no imagination or commitment to students. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Sponsored Classes. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
No different to a school having an agreement with Yamaha to buy their keyboards from them in bulk for an "educational discount" so far as I can see. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Focussing exclusively on one piece of software is generally detrimental, generic hardware less so... mostly a keyboard's just a keyboard, though there should ideally be a choice. Society is a lot more corporate than it was than when even I was at school, so any mention of a brand-name will arouse suspicion. We only need to cast a glance over the pond to our American cousins to get a sniff of the possible future of Corporate Branding within our schools. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Oh yes, things like kids getting suspended for wearing a coke tshirt on pepsi day (in pepsi sponsored schools) sucks big time and I'd hate to that here. To be fair to teachers/schools though, it'd be v. hard to teach all music programs. I think so long as kids are allowed to submit work done in other programs/coding languages (as I was in school) I think it's okay. I think if you wanted to cover even 'only' reason, floops, ableton and cubase, you'd have a hard time covering all the basics in those programs. The kids would get a lot more out of covering any one of those programs in depth IMO. I can see where you're coming from though. Taking the example to hardware, if I was a teacher looking to teach kids about synthesis these days, there's no doubt in my mind that I'd pick the SH-201. I think it's actually the best modern hardware synth for explaining the basics of synthesis on (it was partly desgined for this). So long as we didn't have to have some Faustian pact with Roland to get them (barring using any Korg/Yamaha/etc gear), I'd have no problem with the whole music dept using them as the basic keyborad. Naturally, if there's a particularly keen/talented kid who wants to use his alesis andromeda to do the exercices instead, I'd let him. The way it was explained to us was that if we chose the non-standard one (I used my own keyboard in music as it happened and programming language in computing), the teacher would try to help, but obviously wouldn't be as knowledgeable about it. I think that's a fair enough situation. I do dislike the general corporate takeover of academia though, in my university a privately run coffee shop (not even the main one) on the campus takes over £1,000,000 (profit, not turnover) per month. Alright, they pay rent to the university, but it's bugger all. The food and drink there is more expensive than in town, but, it's the only choice if you want to grab something in the 5-10 minutes between classes. I'd rather a non-profit student union run o |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
A coffee shop makes a profit of a million pounds per month?? Tell me that's a typo... otherwise that is insanity! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
It's a tough thing, to balance concepts with application. On the one hand, its good for students to see a variety of applications, and so in that sense, I think using one piece of gear/software is detrimental, but on the other hand, some things lend themselves to teaching, better. And also, most important is the concepts being learned... so having a familiar environment is good thing to have, so the student can apply the concept, and not have to spend too much time getting caught up in the functions and quirks of multiple programs/gear etc. Personally, I think the best platform for learning synthesis is the nord modulars. Either the original, the G2, or the software even. The software is free, yet you can do so much with it. Only downsides are its monophonic, has a high pitched drone, lower sound quality then the hardware, and a few functions are turned off (although they were extremely generous with most modules) But seriously... learning modularly, being able to plug things in here and there, isolating specific functions etc... the nord excels at that, and I think when learning the fundamentals of synthesis, it's very important. Reaktor is flexible, but I think too advanced for teaching with. It isnt the most intuitive program to use. Tassman is pretty good, but still less intuitive then the nord I think. The moog modular V is ok too, but also not as intuitive, and not as flexible as the nord. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
pff. what wank |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Maybe instead of wasting time with shitty music making basics they should reintroduce the teaching of things such and reading, writing and maths. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Nope, no typo, just insanity. It's not very big either, the sales area is about half the size of my lounge and the seating area is the size of my lounge. Typically there's only 1-2 members of staff on at any given time. There's a near-constant queue in there, even during classes (as obviously there's always someone with a free period). |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
You don't think allowing the kid with the alesis (which equates to wealthy parents) to use it would be unfair to the other kids? If he had one, and knew how to use it, there's no use in teaching him it, and if it's a better synth, he'd have an advantage over the other kids. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I say teach music theory and composition first, then worry about what kind of fancy synth and software you wanna use. If they wanna learn Reason, they can do what the rest of us do - download it off the internet and read the tutorial! Ceri, I am stunned at that profit margin... I've been wasting my time making electronic music, I'm going into the goddam Coffee Shop business! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I completely agree... music theory and composition is dying these days. It's pretty sad. With all this amazing sound design and production techniques, if it was in the hands of a serious composer, there could be some amazing music... but people are more interested in a crazy sound, than a well thought out emotive melody/chord sequence/etc. At the very least, theory should be taught at the same time as synthesis, if not before. But it's true, it's a lot easier to fiddle around and make cool sounds, then it is to fiddle around and make good music. So, learn music, and work on sound design later. It's a losing battle though... ah well. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
also, on the other side of the spectrum, a lot of great composers don't seem to be tapping the potential of sound design and production. This is a glaringly obvious hole in music right now... and I'm surprised more people aren't trying to fill that hole. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Ochre? ;) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
he said 'great composers' |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I don't know. Thats a matter of taste. People who learn composition generally are conditioned to listen for different things than an end listener is. The value in composition is just that, the composition. Focusing on production and sound design really steals the attention from whats most important. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Composition encompasses production and sound design, of course. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I dissagree. I think thats an extremely broad application for a specialized term, kind of like calling someone who paints cars a mechanic. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I think its more accurate to say production encompasses production and sound design. Mind, you can be good at both. Quite a few good composers are. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
O.K. tell you what - study the music scores of classical music and tell me there's no sound design or production in them. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Agreed. There are people who are sound designers, who are not producers (people who make sound effects for games, films, etc.). There are people who are producers who are not sound designers (someone who just uses pre-made loops to make music, for example). That's not to say people can't do both, a lot of people who do one do the other. There are some who only do one though. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
What are you using to define the term sound design or production? Sound design to me is using waveforms combined with filters and fm and reverbs and the like to make new sounds. Production is using filters and EQ's and multitracking and leveling and the like to make something sound professional. Tell me when they made it mandatory to focus on EQ's and reverbs and filters in scores, and I will tell you when they forgot what the composition was supposed to be and just started overlooking it in lieu of gimmicks and technology. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
My last one was meant to respond to this comment. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i think simon posfrod is filling that hole rather nicely. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
So, sound design and production are modern inventions? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Yes. Likewise, you can have good musicians who aren't good at anything beyond just being good at keyboards or guitars. I knew this guy who was a brilliant keyboardist, but was afraid to turn any of the knobs on his gear because it would change the sounds. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
O.K. never mind you seem to be referring to electronic music, rather than music. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Ochre eh? I havent heard any of his stuff for a long time.. Ill have to hunt some down. But taxidermist: I could go on a very long rant about this... but I just woke up, and Im sure Id make little sense... but basically, I dont look at any of these things as separate. Composition, sound design, production.... to me all of those = composition. When you start to define things, you start building barriers, you get caught up in semantics... its kind of exactly what I was saying about not a lot of composers using sound design, and vice versa... its because people are looking at them as separate things. They are the same thing! I think when you realize this, is when you can really start to get creative. And yeah, marlowe is dead on... study some classical orchestral scores. That is sound design pure and simple. ceri: of course, when it comes to industry/commercial stuff, people have different roles, ie sound designers, engineers, composers etc... but that is merely because they are functioning as a corporation in a sense... they get specialists and assign them to a role, to maximize the quality of each. IF they hired one person to do all sound and music for a movie... it would be too much. And if they just got a bunch of people that where equally talented in each field, and were told "ok, just get it all done" itd be a mess. In the commercial world, roles and functions are important to get deadlines done, to be held responsible for certain tasks, and etc. But when we just talk about music for the sake of music... all these definitions mean nothing. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Even by that definition, the old composers did sound design: Having two violins play is kind of the same as using the violin waveform and modifying it with the other violin waveform, effectively creating texture, overtones, etc. Have you heard the wonderful texture of two saxes playing at the same time? Add to that such things as writing notes for cannons and church bells, and I'd say you have sound design. Production: How many violins (volume), where to position them, which instruments to use (one instrument supports another, adding a cello adds mid/bass; EQ) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Good point. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I understand that, and took that into consideration when I made that post. One thing that either of you left out was the fact that the old composers would also compose for the auditoriums and buildings that their pieces were going to be listened in. That takes into account reverb and possible phasing effects that will happen to the sounds. Still, I refuse to use that liberal a term for a field that specialized. Composition is one of the skills. Likewise Sound design is another, and production is another. They are all different art forms that border upon each other closely. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
That's pretty dumb, firstly calling it a specialised field and then ignoring its antecedents. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Just because you have an extremely loose personal definition of what something is doesn't mean you need to go around calling people dumb. And I am not ignoring anything. I never said the different parts were less important. You guys seem to have this immature impression that anyone who plays with a wave editor is a composer, when I feel that composers deserve a lot more credit than that, likewise, anyone who is a good sound designer should get the credit for that field. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
What are you talking about? We're talking about classical composers, not people who manipulate waveforms in their bedrooms. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
What it all boils down to, though, in this case, is that if you're taught a class called "sound composition," you'll probably learn about the other things as well simply because a note on paper isn't the same as a note being played and yet the only reason for putting the note on paper is for it to be played; a composer needs to know how the note will sound as played by the instrument it is being played with and in conjunction with the other instruments being played at the same time; an A is never "just" an A (unless it's a sine wave), but depending on the instrument, a whole range of notes played as overtones. If you put an A on a violin and a D on an oboe at the same time, these overtones may create unwanted (or wanted) dissonance. I'm also not really sure about any of your uses of "sound design," as the simply defines sound design as a term signifying the process of making all the different aspects of sound accompanying any narrative structure (a play, a movie, whatever; the score, foley, dialogue) come together properly. In other words, the sound designer is more like what you could call a studio recording engineer/mixer than anything else. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
