drugs = better music? | xltronic messageboard
 
You are not logged in!

F.A.Q
Log in

Register
  
 
  
 
(nobody)
...and 600 guests

Last 5 registered
Oplandisks
nothingstar
N_loop
yipe
foxtrotromeo

Browse members...
  
 
Members 8025
Messages 2614121
Today 0
Topics 127542
  
 
Messageboard index
drugs = better music?
 

offline Drunken Mastah from OPPERKLASSESVIN!!! (Norway) on 2004-07-31 05:44 [#01291222]
Points: 35867 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



this has probably been discussed here before.. but just in
case it hasn't: Do you think that using drugs will increase
your ability to make great music?

I've never done drugs, but I've tried making music while
drunk.. it turned out like shit... however, if you consider
that most of the big artists probably were on drugs when
creating their "classic" tracks that have inspired and
influenced music ever since, I can't help but wonder if I
would make better music if I used drugs...

(btw: even thought I was CERTAIN I would make better music
on drugs, I wouldn't do it... I want the music to be made by
me!)


 

offline -crazone from smashing acid over and over on 2004-07-31 06:10 [#01291237]
Points: 11234 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



I always create music, paintings, etc, when I smoke Bud, it
makes me creative but the results are worse when I compare
them with things I've created sober.


 

offline clint from Silencio... (United Kingdom) on 2004-07-31 06:12 [#01291239]
Points: 3447 Status: Lurker



"(btw: even thought I was CERTAIN I would make better music

on drugs, I wouldn't do it... I want the music to be made by

me!)"

Hmm you could argue that it the drugs stimulate parts of
your brain you wouldn't normally use to make music.
Therefore it is still you making the music.

I don't know really, when I'm drunk I make shitty music
aswell :) I remember reading an interview with RDJ where he
said that he makes rubbish music when on drugs. I guess for
electronic music where technical accuracy is paramount you
need to have a clear mind. More rocky/psycadelic/lyrical
stuff I certainly think can be enhanced by drugs though.


 

offline Bax from Valencia (Spain) on 2004-07-31 06:15 [#01291241]
Points: 6 Status: Regular



not that you are best on drugs, just that u think its better
while u create it, then u hear it sober and maybe it doesnt
sound as well as when stoned.


 

offline deepspace9mm from filth on 2004-07-31 06:44 [#01291256]
Points: 6846 Status: Addict



Yeah, it might sound like the honeyed milk from god's own
teat when you're making it, but it certainly doesn't later
on. I was playing acoustic guitar on mushrooms once... i'd
never heard such beautiful music. Then when i had come down
a friend told me i'd been playing the same note over and
over for nearly an hour.


 

offline weltact from Taiwan on 2004-07-31 07:12 [#01291267]
Points: 1258 Status: Regular



drugs and alchohol r 2 completely different things!
alchohol doesnt stimulate anything except yr honesty, which
is not a good thing most of the times..

and drugs stimulate everything that is in yr head..thats a
known fact, that all the big names in electronic music r
doing some drugs..

that doesnt mean that if u r thick as fuck ur gonna be
better musician when drugged

i respect drugs


 

offline rockenjohnny from champagne socialism (Australia) on 2004-07-31 07:24 [#01291270]
Points: 7983 Status: Lurker



short term maybe

long term it kills yer creativity stone dead


 

offline Anus_Presley on 2004-07-31 07:27 [#01291272]
Points: 23472 Status: Lurker



Oh God no, not this old arrgument again.


 

offline Dannn_ from United Kingdom on 2004-07-31 07:45 [#01291279]
Points: 7877 Status: Lurker



I wrote a fascinating little story thing when I think I must
have been drunk and stoned because it was just there the
next day and I don't really remember writing it, but it was
very cool. I think stuff made while under the influence can
be very good at times, but it always needs a sober mind to
polish it up.


 

offline Atli from Reykjavík (Iceland) on 2004-07-31 08:18 [#01291292]
Points: 1309 Status: Lurker



there is a famous musician in iceland that was really deep
in drugs a few years back. i think he's getting close to 50
years now. he said that when he first tried hashish,
cocaine, lsd and other drugs he thought "i'm always gonna be
like this, high or stoned". then later on, getting
high/stoned became the main objective, not making music. so
although it was nice at the beginning, it really didn't help
in the long run.

i don't think you need drugs to make music unless you've got
no ideas and your brain is shit, which might be the case
with some.


 

offline happy cycling from berlin on 2004-07-31 08:38 [#01291299]
Points: 2786 Status: Regular



i´m an advocate of controlled drug use, but to be honest i
don´t think it improves your craft.. producing a great
artifact (a track, or a song, or whatever) takes a lot of
discipline and persistence, and this doesn´t seem to be
something drugs inspire.

on the other hand, sometimes people become claustrophobic,
bored and bitter regarding everything related to art.. a
profound drug experience can often jolt someone out of that
mindset and dissolve a block.. but then we´re back again to
the issue of discipline and effort.


 

offline happy cycling from berlin on 2004-07-31 08:39 [#01291300]
Points: 2786 Status: Regular



oh, and i´ve posted it before -- but check this
out. i think it might be a fake, tho.


 

offline clint from Silencio... (United Kingdom) on 2004-07-31 08:42 [#01291303]
Points: 3447 Status: Lurker | Followup to weltact: #01291267



Hmm they're not different, there are drugs with very similar
effects to alchohol - all the depressants. These have
drastically different effects to things such as psychadelics
or uppers (can't remember the proper name?)


 

offline clint from Silencio... (United Kingdom) on 2004-07-31 08:44 [#01291305]
Points: 3447 Status: Lurker | Followup to happy cycling: #01291299



Yea ultimately I think drugs can be good for the inpiration
and creativity side but not the technical and judgemental
side...


 

offline ChildrenTalking from United States on 2004-07-31 08:46 [#01291308]
Points: 2712 Status: Addict | Followup to happy cycling: #01291300



i dont see how he managed to draw this under the influence
of acid sketch just doesn't seem real to me.


 

offline Jarworski from The Grove (United Kingdom) on 2004-07-31 08:48 [#01291309]
Points: 10836 Status: Lurker



Marijuana helps eliminate the cheese from my music.


 

offline ChildrenTalking from United States on 2004-07-31 08:54 [#01291314]
Points: 2712 Status: Addict | Followup to happy cycling: #01291300



you made an interesting point for discussion, happy. i would
like to see such an experiment carried out on camera. so i
can see for myself how it effects the way he perceives his
environment and acts during his work.


 

offline -crazone from smashing acid over and over on 2004-07-31 09:32 [#01291329]
Points: 11234 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



I once watched some artworks from HR giger under the
influence of LSD, I discovered his paintings were made under
the influence of LSD; He's the greatest artist I've ever
known cause he CAN paint under the influence of LSD for the
LSD user, this guy is a genius


 

offline nacmat on 2004-07-31 09:40 [#01291334]
Points: 31271 Status: Lurker



the other day I listened to lory d "sounds never seen"
totally stoned

it was incredible


 

offline -crazone from smashing acid over and over on 2004-07-31 09:44 [#01291340]
Points: 11234 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



next time listen to wevie stonder and you'll be LOL


 

offline deepspace9mm from filth on 2004-07-31 09:47 [#01291346]
Points: 6846 Status: Addict



I listened to some world saxophone quartet yesterday when i
was smoking... un-be-lieeeeeeeev-able. Listening to
music is the best thing about getting stoned for me.


 

offline hedphukkerr from mathbotton (United States) on 2004-07-31 09:57 [#01291357]
Points: 8833 Status: Regular



listening to music while stoned = bliss
making music while stoned = bliss while youre doing it,
highly underwhemling afterwords. or at least thats what ive
found.


 

offline Dozer on 2004-07-31 13:07 [#01291509]
Points: 1234 Status: Regular



"Nobody whose art was influenced by drug encounters has
created a sensibility or a language that has been important
to the development of culture, or the evolution of mankind."


 

offline nobsmuggler from silly mid-off on 2004-07-31 13:09 [#01291512]
Points: 6265 Status: Addict



i never take drugs when making tracks

it important you know that


 

offline acrid milk hall from United Kingdom on 2004-07-31 13:15 [#01291515]
Points: 2916 Status: Lurker



drugs are an experience, like any other.
when you have experienced (or are experiencing) something
you can feel inspired to be creative.

seeing a part of the world you've never seen before, falling
in love, taking drugs, having a near-death experience,
having a great weekend with friends, having great sex,
losing everyone and everything you care about.. it's all the
same really. theyre just experiences.

only, with drugs, you are more in control. you chose when
you have the experience. in a way, its a soft option because
it's more immediate than getting out there and living life
in order to be inspired.

but if you are too busy experiencing things, you will cease
to be creative. whether it be drugs, great sex, depression,
love, seeing the world, etc.


 

offline happy cycling from berlin on 2004-07-31 13:30 [#01291516]
Points: 2786 Status: Regular | Followup to Dozer: #01291509



this is a presumptious, and patently incorrect assertion.
there is a not insiginificant number of profoundly important
intellectuals and artists who were habitual users of drugs.
i don't have a list handy, but freud and baudelaire come to
mind. baudelaire is often credited with being the first
modernist in art, and was a heavy user of hashish, of which
he wrote both an essay and several poems. freud frequently
did cocaine, and wrote a treatise in its praise -- freud did
precisely what you are claiming is impossible for drug users
-- that is, he conceptualized a new "language" -- a new way
of talking about being.


 

offline fleetmouse from Horny for Truth on 2004-07-31 13:30 [#01291517]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker



Drugs make you ugly and stupid like George W. Bush. Be
handsome and smart like Bill Clinton and don't inhale.


 

offline acrid milk hall from United Kingdom on 2004-07-31 13:35 [#01291520]
Points: 2916 Status: Lurker | Followup to fleetmouse: #01291517



but BOTH of them have sex with ugly women.. in the light of
which, you could conclude that drugs have a neutral effect.


 

offline clint from Silencio... (United Kingdom) on 2004-07-31 14:08 [#01291538]
Points: 3447 Status: Lurker | Followup to happy cycling: #01291516



It seems like every classic creative was an freakin opium
user/addict :) Whether or not their work was influenced
directly is arguable...


 

offline clint from Silencio... (United Kingdom) on 2004-07-31 14:11 [#01291542]
Points: 3447 Status: Lurker



Jus found this

Might be interesting to some


 

offline happy cycling from berlin on 2004-07-31 14:17 [#01291549]
Points: 2786 Status: Regular | Followup to clint: #01291542



hey, this is pretty good:

Simple situations may take on a symbolic, historical,
religious, or mysterious nature. Life reaches [...] a unity
that has no end. Siegal and West (1975) expand on this idea
saying that there is an intensification of internal input,
the inner self takes on outer qualities. More images
are seen than can be processed. Unexpected and unplanned
emerging ideas catch the person off guard.


this is a fantastic, incredibly accurate (as far as my
experience goes) description.


 

offline fleetmouse from Horny for Truth on 2004-07-31 14:27 [#01291561]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker | Followup to happy cycling: #01291549



I wonder if that's how retarded people feel every day of
their lives - blown away and staggered by the simplest ideas
and situations.


 

offline OK on 2004-07-31 14:31 [#01291567]
Points: 4791 Status: Lurker



drugs make you really stupid for a while.. that what make
them so good. and stupid people think leess and do more
withouth doubt.. so it's easier to make stuff.

there's emotional and technical. technical can't be
acomplished with drugs


 

offline Ophecks from Nova Scotia (Canada) on 2004-07-31 14:37 [#01291572]
Points: 19190 Status: Moderator | Show recordbag



All the best music I've ever heard, even that which is
falsely attributed to be influenced heavily by drugs, has
been made by people that were not stoned or tripping (though
no doubt they got stoned after completing it). Drugs can
make for some interesting music, for sure, some good music.
Better, oh fuck no.


 

offline qrter from the future, and it works (Netherlands, The) on 2004-07-31 14:41 [#01291577]
Points: 47414 Status: Moderator | Followup to Drunken Mastah: #01291222



"however, if you consider that most of the big artists
probably were on drugs when creating their "classic" tracks
that have inspired and influenced music ever since"


..what?

how did you come to that assumption?


 

offline qrter from the future, and it works (Netherlands, The) on 2004-07-31 14:44 [#01291581]
Points: 47414 Status: Moderator | Followup to happy cycling: #01291516



yes, but did he do that while under the influence?

that's what this discussion is about.

(on a sidenote, Freud was pretty easy in feeding cocaine to
his patients, which turned out rather nasty for a lot of
them..)


 

offline Ophecks from Nova Scotia (Canada) on 2004-07-31 14:46 [#01291586]
Points: 19190 Status: Moderator | Followup to qrter: #01291577 | Show recordbag



If that's referring to The Beatles and other classic ''drug
acts'', no Beatles song has any content whatsoever that was
recorded under any type of influence. It's not like they
dropped a hit and suddenly had Lucy in the Sky
with Diamonds, the only thing druggy about that was
the stupid in-joke. And I'm sure the same goes for nearly
all classic drug addled albums. They would have all existed
with or without drugs.


 

offline earthleakage from tell the world you're winning on 2004-07-31 14:57 [#01291594]
Points: 27795 Status: Regular



ringo mustve been on drugs. no-one can be that bad a drummer
normally.


 

offline boobah from pants on 2004-07-31 15:24 [#01291611]
Points: 613 Status: Lurker



the right drugs do, some just make you have a good time and
not care what music's on.


 

offline Zeus from San Francisco (United States) on 2004-07-31 15:31 [#01291619]
Points: 14042 Status: Lurker



its just a different experiance. maybe some people work
better in this mind set. others dont.



 

offline mrgypsum on 2004-07-31 15:49 [#01291642]
Points: 5103 Status: Lurker



if you can make great music, not on drugs, you can make
great music while under the influence. your state of mind
is independent of your ability to create great music.
basically, you either have it or you dont. take the beatles
for example, they made great music before and after the
influence of drugs.


 

offline OK on 2004-07-31 15:57 [#01291647]
Points: 4791 Status: Lurker | Followup to Ophecks: #01291586



for a beatlemaniac you know very little


 

offline Ophecks from Nova Scotia (Canada) on 2004-07-31 16:23 [#01291667]
Points: 19190 Status: Moderator | Followup to OK: #01291647 | Show recordbag



What exactly am I missing, can you explain?


 

offline mrgypsum on 2004-07-31 16:27 [#01291671]
Points: 5103 Status: Lurker | Followup to Ophecks: #01291667



i think its pretty obvious that the beatles used drugs. i
dont thing that their music got better for it, but they used
them none the less. it might have changed their sound, or
changed what they wrote about. going from songs like i want
to hold your hand, to lucy in the sky with diamonds, you can
see drugs playing an influence.


 

offline Zeus from San Francisco (United States) on 2004-07-31 16:30 [#01291674]
Points: 14042 Status: Lurker | Followup to mrgypsum: #01291671



1. he said they didnt RECORD under the influence. everyone
knows they used drugs.

2. Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds is a COINCIDENCE. Its based
on a drawing lennons son made. its documented.


 

offline mrgypsum on 2004-07-31 16:36 [#01291687]
Points: 5103 Status: Lurker | Followup to Zeus: #01291674



i dont think anyone would want to purposely record on drugs,
all i am saying is drugs had a role on how they created
music.


 

offline earthleakage from tell the world you're winning on 2004-07-31 16:36 [#01291689]
Points: 27795 Status: Regular



haha! next thing you'll be telling me syd barrett & captain
beefheart never took drugs


 

offline Ophecks from Nova Scotia (Canada) on 2004-07-31 16:37 [#01291692]
Points: 19190 Status: Moderator | Followup to mrgypsum: #01291671 | Show recordbag



Obviously, but that ''influence'' is blown way out of
proportion, though, romanticized. It had just about
everything to do with the artists and movements around them,
not the substances they were experimenting with. A ''Yellow
Submarine'' is a yellow pill, but that's not a drug song.
''She Said She Said'' is about a line John heard a tripping
Peter Fonda say, but it's not a drug song, and the music on
there is more Byrds than acid. Lucy in the Sky wasn't
written or performed under any influence, though it has some
nice druggy whimsy in there. It's Lewis Carroll, not
lysergic.

''Love to turn you on''... that doesn't make anything a drug
song. Everything they came up with on every druggy banned
song was totally done perfectly sober.

The only ''idea'' I can think of that MIGHT have been a
direct result of drugs is the backwards clips. They
discovered them during a trip. Then, when clear headed, they
put it to good use.

John was quoted as saying everything they recorded or came
up with while high or tripping was shit, and thrown in the
''dust bin''. Any drug references in their songs is a
product of the times, and just window dressing.

I guess it's fair to say they might have been a bit inspired
by it, but the lyrics and music itself was composed by
perfectly clear heads, and the drugs didn't spur them on to
any greater heights than they were scaling anyway. It was
just funny and counter culture to slip in some stupid drug
references here and there.


 

offline Ophecks from Nova Scotia (Canada) on 2004-07-31 16:43 [#01291700]
Points: 19190 Status: Moderator | Followup to mrgypsum: #01291687 | Show recordbag



I don't think it had much a role in the actual compositions,
but it definitely had a role in the SPIRIT of the music.
Which I suppose you could lump in with composition, so I see
your point. But crazy stuff like Mr. Kite and Within You
Without You, those sounds shouldn't be credited to the
influences of chemicals. All those trippy songs aren't very
trippy at all, it was just a natural progression. The drugs
colored their music, but they didn't alter directions.


 

offline mrgypsum on 2004-07-31 18:33 [#01291760]
Points: 5103 Status: Lurker | Followup to Ophecks: #01291700



well they were writing some songs from their experiences
while on drugs, and i am not just talking about lyrics. i
agree with you about how much people over emphasize the drug
influence, but you cannot deny its presence. btw, i dont
like their music, but i do love some artists who were
influenced by them.


 


Messageboard index