Do you consider electronic music creators musicians?

~~Rubato~~ · 02-22-2012, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mr dave

@Rubato - Why so defensive?

Defensive? I do apologise if it looks that way, I'm just putting my opinions across and trying to understand your point of view. Try reading my posts in a more cheerful tone, text tends to leave itself open too much to interpretation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mr dave

Here's my personal anecdote about an 'electronic music creator'. I was in an A/V class years ago and one of the assignments was to create a radio spot using stock or original music. One group made a spot for 'The Music of Student's Name'. It was jam packed with phenomenally smooth and intricate piano arpeggios like Chopin channeled through Oscar Peterson.

The guy had stubby sausage fingers.

All he actually did was plot notes into a piece of computer software. Is it OK for him to present himself as a musician when he lacked the ability to perform or tangible experience with the actual instrument. No one in the lecture theater outside his study group thought so. From what I've read in this thread so far I'm curious. Was he (with his complete lack of ability to actually play the instrument called the Piano) and actual piano based musician?

Yes, he is a musician, there are many instances where a musician has created something beyond their own ability, Scriabin composed a few pieces he himself couldn't play. If someone is writing a piece for orchestra they don't go about it by playing every instrument separately, in fact they often write pieces for instruments they don't play themselves.

What's the fundamental difference between Just plotting down notes into a piece of computer software and just playing a few notes on piano? a piano is just a tool, as is the program used to play the piece. Most electronic music tends to fail at being able to use convincing articulation, dynamics and rubato, leaving the end result rather cold, even those that can are severely outmatched by their more traditional counterparts, but their use and end goal is the same, the electronic one just lacks the performance value.

rnrloser_IX · 02-24-2012, 01:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rubato

What's the fundamental difference between Just plotting down notes into a piece of computer software and just playing a few notes on piano? a piano is just a tool, as is the program used to play the piece. Most electronic music tends to fail at being able to use convincing articulation, dynamics and rubato, leaving the end result rather cold, even those that can are severely outmatched by their more traditional counterparts, but their use and end goal is the same, the electronic one just lacks the performance value.

There is actually a big difference between plotting the notes and playing the notes, even if the tune is the same and the sound produced by the computer is accurate and doesn't sound like a "generated piano" tone. A piano, or any other instrument, is not just a tool. There is an important relationship between the player and the instrument that affects how it sounds, especially things like woodwinds/brass, percussion, and stringed instruments. My brother can take my guitar and play something and then I could mimic it on the same set up, but it wouldn't sound nearly as good. He plays better than me, even really easy basic things sound better with him. There are a bunch of factors that go into producing a specific sound that is just not accomplishable by plotting an A note. This can include how hard you push air with your lungs, where your pushing it from, how you position you're hand or strum, or even how you press to the next note on a piano (this is an array of things pertaining to a bunch of different instruments). Modifying these things can have huge impact on the overall sound of a piece and really separates the weekend warriors from the professionals (not trying to discredit the weekend warrior, just saying a professional is usually a bit, or a lot, better).

Besides, have you ever noticed that not everyone can play an instrument. There is a reason. An instrument isn't simply push here and blow and therefore is different from a tool. If it were just a tool then anyone could do it as easily as using a screwdriver (twist here), a hammer (hit there), a saw (do back forth motion), or a power drill (pull trigger). Its different, even with the very basics, not everyone can play basic patterns like a seasoned player. Even if they do the motions correctly, it can still sound like crap. This is a huge distinguishing feature between a mediocre rhythm player and a professional. Even if they're playing an incredibly easy progression, the professional will sound better.

~~Rubato~~ · 02-24-2012, 04:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rnrloser_IX

There is actually a big difference between plotting the notes and playing the notes, even if the tune is the same and the sound produced by the computer is accurate and doesn't sound like a "generated piano" tone. A piano, or any other instrument, is not just a tool. There is an important relationship between the player and the instrument that affects how it sounds, especially things like woodwinds/brass, percussion, and stringed instruments. My brother can take my guitar and play something and then I could mimic it on the same set up, but it wouldn't sound nearly as good. He plays better than me, even really easy basic things sound better with him. There are a bunch of factors that go into producing a specific sound that is just not accomplishable by plotting an A note. This can include how hard you push air with your lungs, where your pushing it from, how you position you're hand or strum, or even how you press to the next note on a piano (this is an array of things pertaining to a bunch of different instruments). Modifying these things can have huge impact on the overall sound of a piece and really separates the weekend warriors from the professionals (not trying to discredit the weekend warrior, just saying a professional is usually a bit, or a lot, better).

you mean like articulation, dynamics and rubato? a musical instrument is more hands on, it gives the user more direct control over the sound produced and after a good few years you can really make the tone your own. Electronic music has been trying to reproduce this, you could tweak every single note individually, it's attack, decay, dynamics and tone by hand, If I'm worried about the subtleties of the finished product I honestly find just playing it on violin to be easier and far less time consuming, if I put as many years into electronic music it would more than likely be the other way round.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rnrloser_IX

Besides, have you ever noticed that not everyone can play an instrument. There is a reason. An instrument isn't simply push here and blow and therefore is different from a tool. If it were just a tool then anyone could do it as easily as using a screwdriver (twist here), a hammer (hit there), a saw (do back forth motion), or a power drill (pull trigger). Its different, even with the very basics, not everyone can play basic patterns like a seasoned player. Even if they do the motions correctly, it can still sound like crap. This is a huge distinguishing feature between a mediocre rhythm player and a professional. Even if they're playing an incredibly easy progression, the professional will sound better.

Playing an instrument was mandatory when I was going through school so I'm not sure I can agree with you, it takes a lot more time to get to grips with an instrument than it does with a hammer or screwdriver but it doesn't make it any less of tool. Not everyone can master an instrument I'll give you that, but the same can be said for a lot of tools, anyone can use a hammer and chisel but it takes a lot of work to become a master joiner.

Dr_Rez · 02-25-2012, 12:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rnrloser_IX

There is actually a big difference between plotting the notes and playing the notes, even if the tune is the same and the sound produced by the computer is accurate and doesn't sound like a "generated piano" tone. A piano, or any other instrument, is not just a tool. There is an important relationship between the player and the instrument that affects how it sounds, especially things like woodwinds/brass, percussion, and stringed instruments. My brother can take my guitar and play something and then I could mimic it on the same set up, but it wouldn't sound nearly as good. He plays better than me, even really easy basic things sound better with him. There are a bunch of factors that go into producing a specific sound that is just not accomplishable by plotting an A note. This can include how hard you push air with your lungs, where your pushing it from, how you position you're hand or strum, or even how you press to the next note on a piano (this is an array of things pertaining to a bunch of different instruments). Modifying these things can have huge impact on the overall sound of a piece and really separates the weekend warriors from the professionals (not trying to discredit the weekend warrior, just saying a professional is usually a bit, or a lot, better).

Besides, have you ever noticed that not everyone can play an instrument. There is a reason. An instrument isn't simply push here and blow and therefore is different from a tool. If it were just a tool then anyone could do it as easily as using a screwdriver (twist here), a hammer (hit there), a saw (do back forth motion), or a power drill (pull trigger). Its different, even with the very basics, not everyone can play basic patterns like a seasoned player. Even if they do the motions correctly, it can still sound like crap. This is a huge distinguishing feature between a mediocre rhythm player and a professional. Even if they're playing an incredibly easy progression, the professional will sound better.

That is honestly the best post in this thread. you described what I wanted to perfectly.