The following article is part of an eight part series exploring my thoughts on the state of electronic music in the current decade compared to the 1990's and 1980's.
--------------------------------------------------------------In some aspects I blame the modern pop music world for this problem, creating a listening expectation of the overly polished track, but the other blame is the software environment in which most music is now composed. While the software environment presents more and more opportunities for artists, the actual tools being used by artists appear to be diminishing. Visiting most music production communities online and searching their posts, you will find that the recommendation of tools follows its own trend: Absynth, Z3ta, Vaz, Fruityloops, Reason, Pro Logic etc. These are trends narrowing the sound palate in an environment that should instead be expanding the palate. While hundreds of sequencers probably exist on the internet for users, a common ten or less are used by probably 90% or more of the user base. Even within these ten most common packages, the software utilizes the same audio processing techniques and engines for competitive reasons, hence creating nearly the same sound. Years ago artists would experiment in various recording formats, with different microphone setups and different studios to try to achieve that unique sound for their music. Perhaps ironically that attitude has now changed to an attitude to if your music doesn't sound like someone else's then it is a bad piece. For example, Propellerhead's Reason is a popular software platform for many artists, particularly electronic artists, that often times receives criticism that its audio engine is not up to par with other "industry standards". Many artists, professional or otherwise, feel the need to bounce audio out of Reason into another piece of software for rendering to achieve that "polished sound" they so desire. What strikes me as astonishing is that artists feel the need to standardize the sound to a common denominator rather then utilize the unique sound characteristics of the platform itself. Imagine for a second the absurdity of someone not liking the analog audio output of a Moog Voyager, so they grafted on a USB port so they could directly record the analog sound digitally. The whole sound characteristic and purpose of the tool becomes lost in the manic need of standardization.Other Chapters in this writing:
.:Part I:The Decade That Should Have Been:.
.:Part II:Where Electronic Music Was:.
.:Part III:Who is to Blame?:.
.:Part IV: The Sound:.
.:Part V: The Tools:.
.:Part VI: Internet:.
.:Part VII: The Artists:.
.:Part VIII: The Birth of the Renaissance:.Stay Tuned for Part VI: The Internet
Tags: The Electronic Renaissance Part V: The Tools Article
--------------------------------------------------------------In some aspects I blame the modern pop music world for this problem, creating a listening expectation of the overly polished track, but the other blame is the software environment in which most music is now composed. While the software environment presents more and more opportunities for artists, the actual tools being used by artists appear to be diminishing. Visiting most music production communities online and searching their posts, you will find that the recommendation of tools follows its own trend: Absynth, Z3ta, Vaz, Fruityloops, Reason, Pro Logic etc. These are trends narrowing the sound palate in an environment that should instead be expanding the palate. While hundreds of sequencers probably exist on the internet for users, a common ten or less are used by probably 90% or more of the user base. Even within these ten most common packages, the software utilizes the same audio processing techniques and engines for competitive reasons, hence creating nearly the same sound. Years ago artists would experiment in various recording formats, with different microphone setups and different studios to try to achieve that unique sound for their music. Perhaps ironically that attitude has now changed to an attitude to if your music doesn't sound like someone else's then it is a bad piece. For example, Propellerhead's Reason is a popular software platform for many artists, particularly electronic artists, that often times receives criticism that its audio engine is not up to par with other "industry standards". Many artists, professional or otherwise, feel the need to bounce audio out of Reason into another piece of software for rendering to achieve that "polished sound" they so desire. What strikes me as astonishing is that artists feel the need to standardize the sound to a common denominator rather then utilize the unique sound characteristics of the platform itself. Imagine for a second the absurdity of someone not liking the analog audio output of a Moog Voyager, so they grafted on a USB port so they could directly record the analog sound digitally. The whole sound characteristic and purpose of the tool becomes lost in the manic need of standardization.Other Chapters in this writing:
.:Part I:The Decade That Should Have Been:.
.:Part II:Where Electronic Music Was:.
.:Part III:Who is to Blame?:.
.:Part IV: The Sound:.
.:Part V: The Tools:.
.:Part VI: Internet:.
.:Part VII: The Artists:.
.:Part VIII: The Birth of the Renaissance:.Stay Tuned for Part VI: The Internet
Tags: The Electronic Renaissance Part V: The Tools Article