Hello all!


i am writing a dissertation on

Are modern production techniques helping artists and record producers to produce the best quality music?



Would love to hear your thoughts

 

So annoying when people write in big bold letters...

 

If by "quality" you mean audio quality, of course yes.

If you mean by "quality" = "talent", it doesn't seem so ! lol

At the very beginning the music industry wasn't here to make money but to promote some brands : Philips, Sony etc... So they didn't care about loosing money, they chose artists and work with them to increase their talents

And as time passing by, I don't really know why, probably because they began to earn more and more money they stopped slowly to work with artists during years, the time was more and more short.

Today they don't give a shit about how talented you are and if your talent can be bigger, they only care if you can sell records (Or anything) RIGHT NOW ! Which is very stupid because most of those guys are dead after one single or album only... If they would bet on a talented guy they would make money on him for years, but don't know what's wrong with them...


So my answer is : No, because nowadays you have to count on yourself only ! You have to be musician, audio engineer, business man and a lot of other jobs yourself... You can't spend your days only writing music or lyrics, so there's less quality... I don't if it makes sense for you ? But this is my point !

 

"modern production techniques" is a very broad area so i'll break it up into several parts

Jessy answered one aspect of it. Here are a few more:

stereo image: modern music production uses less dodgy ways of making stereo image such as hard panning (good)

jacking up the volume: each year the average volume of songs seems to increase. see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war . (bad)

premade material: these days, people have access to construction kits, loops, samples, which could make you lazier (bad). related: played drums may also be replaced with sampled drums.

 

Are modern production techniques helping artists and record producers to produce the best quality music?

Looking at the technical aspects i definitely think: YES!
I myself have experiences with the [good?] old recording techniques from the past; recording on tape machines, mixing on real mixing desks, working with faders, sliders and so on. With the (almost magic) tools we have today we can get very good results in terms of audio quality, without having the need to go into a studio. BUT the tools alone don't make you to a great composer, engineer or musician from one day to the other!

Nevertheless the situation for musicians is getting better and better because they have now access to the tools to create their own stuff without heavy pressures or interferences from the part of recording companies. I also mostly agree with Jessycd > the music industry has still their pure economical and political interests. They only promote and push artists who have already gained "their chair in heaven" LOL! = sold enough stuff.

I wish that also the people of the non-white-world could gain access to the tools that we already have,
because i see (hear) an incredible amount of talents from those parts of the world.

 

Yes but I'm not sure it's a good thing... With the music industry of the past, they were choosing some artists in who they believed in, only those few with talent and hard worker musicians (It's still a subjective matter) had a chance to get further, recordings, meet writers, composers, engineers etc... That they would work with. The music industry were passionate about good music.

Nowadays everyone with a computer can record their stuff, can have a Myspace, Facebook or whatever... There's so much people we see people making definitive crap getting big just because they have pink hair and good pictures (I think of Jeffree Star for example)
(Image is important anyway)

It seems no one cares about music (Or not as much as they did in the past) because they feed us shit, we were educated (I guess, I'm young, I didn't live in the past), they uneducate us ! lol



So there's a huge amount of shit, 99,9% is crap, and the 00,1% of interesting things are lost in that stinky sea of shit ! Everyone wants to be famous, so music industry is taking advantage of the situation...

My vision is (maybe) cruel, but it just can't work this way... Or we should all forget to live by our music/work, and do it for free ! It's maybe not that bad, but you can't get really big if you have "common life" problems, you have to do a job etc... And no fund/help from industry... Sadly ! lol


All this situation is our chance as it's our doom... It's a new world lol


Concerning "non white" people anyway, when you look at History, only Black people can play good music ! I'm white but it's a fact ! lol So yeah, maybe something good will come from them (Again) x)

 

today it seems much easier to hide the lack of creativity or composition skills behind a well-produced/phät/loud wall of sound. the loss of dynamic range in "popular" music should be obvious...

the question isn't that easy to answer. there is the light and there is shadow, and music is always a associative thing. holy grails such as stairway to heaven, lucy in the sky (..), child in time or riders of the storm are just perfect how they were produced decades ago... IMO.
on the other hand I like the possibilities and full sound of modern music production techniques... but it shouldn't be more important than talent, creativity, "vision" or anything like that.

 

Modern production techniques are making everybody as a "musician", but...

"If everybody is a musician, and everybody is making mediocre music, evenly the world is just cover with mediocrity, and people start to become confortable of mediocrity. And that to me is the danger." - Moby

Look at how today we praise Adele. And why are we praising her so much ? Because there is near to nothing to compete with her.
If she was born in the fifties, I doubt she will compete 20 years later against Nina Simone, Aretha Franklin or even Cheryl Lynn...

http://www.record-producer.com/index.php?a=5145

 

The music industry of the past was perhaps better under some aspects, but in many ways those artists were chained to their producers, very often exploited and used like puppets on strings and then trashed or forgotten. "It's a long way to the top if you wanna Rock'n Roll" (AC/DC)! Same is still actual with other artists like painters, who get exploited by Galerists and Art galleries.

I believe that it's better to be free from these "chains" and blood-suckers. So the social media give us just platforms on which we can bring on our "creations". The Internet seems to be the most democratic reality for now. All the other medias are controlled by parties, lobbies, groups of rich, or even masons! But you have to work harder today and you have to believe in what you're doing, that's why i mentioned the non-white-world.....cause those folks don't care about money or success, they just do it! And i don't mean only the black people.

 

@ Firstandlast,

As your main question is :

and as it's accurate, targeted and well-formulated, I'll give you my OWN opinion as shortly as possible and without arguing about external matters like commercial issues, more or less talented musicians,...

Well, YES... modern production techniques help artists and record producers to get better quality music than with the tools of the past. You have certainly noticed that I wrote 'quality' in BOLD because I'm talking about the 'sonic qualities' of the music, not the quality of the content ! (It must to be said, because confusion may be very important !)
You can't in anyway compare the tools at our disposal nowadays with the tools of the past... or maybe for some 'nostalgic' people, but this kind of people will be present in any period and in any area (not only in music !).
These same 'modern production techniques' can also help (and greatly in some cases) artists that are not necessarily considered as 'pure genius' or 'top-notch musicians' because some of these 'modern tools' can somewhat hide, or at least help them to fill some of their gaps or weaknesses... I talk you about that with 'Celemony Melodyne' in mind. As you have probably heard of this program, you know that it can greatly helps and improves a vocalist (or any other instrument or even music material) performance by correcting his pitch accuracy when he's not perfectly in tune. Of course, some people (or even a lot !) will arguing about is 'overuse' or 'misuse'... but your main question is 'Are modern production techniques helping artists and record producers to produce the best quality music ?', so once again, YES, modern production techniques and/or tools help anybody to get better quality music... and this example of 'Celemony Melodyne' was just one among dozens because a lot of 'modern tools' can help to increase the 'sonic' qualities of today music.

And finally, on the other hand, the fact that 'modern tools' are available for artists and record producers lead them to have no more 'room for error'. Effectively, as the sonic qualities of all the gears increase year after year, they can no more afford to present poor or mediocre creations (always purely in terms of sound and sonic qualities !). This leads, and maybe here is the great difference, to new challenges and to always having to make better, once again, in terms of sonic qualities...

By the way, good luck for your dissertation and I hope that you'll get your exam or diploma (if it's the purpose of your dissertation in some way). *yes*

 

Is best sound new than sound good.
Or you prefer a song thats sound "perfect" but dont tell anything.Cant make dance people....
On other side, a simple melody can stay in your mind one week to dead.
Today people hear music on mobile phones without phones and direct from notebooks. this is quality? how much freq. response have their speakers? people have notice diference to mp3, cd,...
A good song is good everywhere without quality dependant. The importat is what the song can transmit, connect or share with us.
People when listen a song tell, I like it or no. Dont said this song sound bad or sound perfect. What is perfect?

enjoy making music if you like it.

answering the topic. can you define "quality"?

 

You forgot to mention how you LOOK i believe it´s more importent than anything.

If you are ugly or look like most people and are VERY talented you havent got a chance in Pop or dance music genres

But you do haver a chance if you play Jazz or Heavy Metal/Hard Rock.

Well in HM you most likely got to dress and look very similar to most of the other who play that music a.k.a long hair beard lots of tatoo´s and black clothes etc etc..

I dont think a record company who is dedicated to the HM genre will sign a band thats look like Kraftwerk or Duran Duran even if they play the heaviest shit ever played if they wants to get signed they have to change how they LOOK.

And if your into modern dance pop music you must learn how to dance

I cant see what that has to do with if you can SING or not?

If you can SING but not dance and you look very ordinary your screwed.

If you can dance and look very pretty but NOT sing
you got a chance think Britney Spears Rihanna etc etc.

 

The face of music is forever changing, we are seeing a monumental change in the way music is written, produced and published.

The old style record co model had A&R departments. Their purpose was to match up Talent with hit songs. They discovered the talent first then had libraries of hit songs written for them. The Artists and songwriters had long and lucrative careers.

Then around 40 -30 years ago the focus changed to self contained groups that wrote their own songs. Most of their careers were not as long as their earlier counterparts.

With the Internet, Publishing and distribution has changed completely. I compare its importance with the invention of the printing press. We can now publish our music to the world by ourselves. You know, The music we also created and recorded for free with our almost free home recording studios.

This diminishes the importance of the record companies, and now there is no risk. The old pressure of "We don't want to loose money on this project" is not there anymore for a lot of creators, especially during the early stages.

Music both suffers and benefits from this paradox. While there are more musical offerings then you could ever listen to, we will however, find many more diamonds in the rough.

This Music transformation is just now forming and should take music to a new level. Hope we are ready.


.

 

Amen ! lol But sonic quality can help sometimes...

So true too ! But those blood-suckers can help you, there's a lot of things you can't do without them, this is the dilemma

I thought I added "Image is important", so yes I agree, image has always been important matter, but it's dangerous when it becomes more important than music itself !

I agree, but who is "smart" (Or let's say patient) enough to find those gems in all that shit ? When you ear shit all day long, one day or another you forget what is "quality" or not !

Haha Moby is Jesus !

 

I think as far as narrowing the gap between professional (or semi-professional) studio quality recordings and mixes, yes...Without question...

As far as making workflow for the average musician? Yes, definitely a much faster workflow as well. But there is one chink in the armor in this regard...As a society we arefixated on instant gratification. On the same token, we are desensitized to the stimulus of music more than ever now. Think about it, how fast do you grow tired of your new "all time favorite" track? How many songs do you listen to today that you would consider "timeless classics" compared to 10, 15, 20 years ago??

The last part may be subjective, but here is my take...

The emergence of software and super fast workflow has in turn allowed producers, programmers, composers etc. etc. to churn out music faster than ever...And this has allowed them to cater to an ever demanding public who cares more about the latest rather than the nuances or feel of the music. And I think a watering down in the substance music carries comes with the territory.

And as far as the "independence" of music from the major labels...sure, it's a little more prevalent than it was during the "pushing units" days..but think about this...The record labels are more consolidated than ever now...I think there's only about 3 major labels in America now, IIRC.. What the dawn of the "computer musician" has done now (ESPECIALLYYY in the case of Hip Hop) is allowed the labels to totally bypass any expenditures on artist cultivation and development...These guys like Soulja Boi, Odd Future, Kendrick Lamar, Mr. Muthafuckin eXquire etc. etc have all started their grassroots following through social media outlets and then approached the major labels with a fully completed album AND a multi-million strong fan base following along with them...Half the work is done for the major already free of charge..

Sorry if I reiterated anybody elses sentiment...I haven't read through all the posts admittedly... I will do so now lol

 

The bolded comment resonated with me the most...

I agree...it's all about money and it goes to show you that if they can save money by relegating the music aspect of it to the "bedroom" they can save money to focus on all the other stimuli that the public galvanize to (dancing and performing, sex appeal etc. etc.). And that, to me, is the saddest thing.. Music has taken even a bigger back seat in this generation, IMHO.

So the labels keep $$$ in their pocket by saving on development, studio time etc. etc. but still get their meat hooks into these artists to pump out production line music to the public.

Music has always been and will always be better at the grassroots level.

 

Just because you have all the tools to build a house doesn't mean you know how to build a house. Or how to build a house that everyone wants to buy or live in. More available and better tools won't make you a better carpenter. More and easier access to paint won't make you a better painter. Somewhere talent and artistic vision have to come into play. Anybody can buy a drumset. That doesn't mean you are going to play drums as well as I do. Anyone can get VST and DAW stuff, but that doesn't replace the hands and ears on experience of my friend burninstar. Tools are not talent and skill. Tools are just better tools.

 

I'm not so sure they save that much money on the "bedroom" recording and production, most of that will be redone and all of these costs are usually the responsibility of the artist to repay.

Most people believe that when you sign with a record company they take care of everything. They just start your tab. You still have to pay them back every cent they invest in you.

The last record contract I signed was over 50 pages long and protected the record company way more than it favored me. You need a music lawyer just to begin to understand it all. Our project did not get released because of a creative problem with the cover art! I even missed out on a opening tour to Europe and the Far East, twice. This was such a big deal I quit a 13 year job at a 5 studio recording complex.

Production line music is going to have a higher quality, but will be focused on the mainstream music. This will provide "Hits" for most of the music listeners.

But, you are right music is often best at the grassroots level.

 

Sorry but I'm not agree at all with this comment !
I don't think that because a Music Style or, even better, simply a Band get a larger audience, especially outside its borders, can involve in any case its music quality. A contrario, some Bands have even taken a 'new dimension' by exporting themselves out of their frontiers.
A good example is AC/DC. I talk about this Band as it seems to me that there's a reference about it above in this thread.
What thinking about AC/DC in a 'grassroots' or 'local' level ? Well, it certainly doesn't changed 'radically' its quality rock music, but apart some Australian people, who would have known it in Europa, United States, South America,... in fact, all around the World ? I rather think that the fact that it was recognized and appreciated at a larger scale has not only promoted the talent of its members, but this also certainly helped them to meet producers like John 'Mutt' Lange (also well-known for his great job with Def Leppard among others) or more recently Andy Johns (another 'Living Legend' Audio Engineer & Producer). I'm pretty sure that these collaborations have certainly pushed AC/DC and its music to higher levels.
And you can without a doubt apply this to many others well-known bands...

 

Studio 555, Don't take what we are trying to convey wrong. Another way to convey this is to say that Music that is popular simply because others can relate to it and enjoy it, might be better for all, than music produced just for profit. Music that stays on the charts only a month or so than vanishes to obscurity.

AC/DC is grassroots music, Huge now, but grassroots in the beginning, Started by two brothers who just enjoyed music and started a band. Even got their name off the back of a sewing machine!

Still today some people say " they were better with Bon Scott "

Grassroot History about AC/DC.

In November 1973 Malcolm and Angus Young formed AC/DC and recruited bassist Larry Van Kriedt, vocalist Dave Evans, and Colin Burgess, ex-Masters Apprentices drummer.[19] Pushing hard for the band's success were Australia’s legendary roadie Ray Arnold and his partner Alan Kissack. The two men convinced Chequers entertainment manager Gene Pierson to let the band play at the popular Sydney nightclub on New Year's Eve, 1973.[20] The band was so loud that management complained. Pierson however took an interest, and booked them into the Bondi Lifesaver and other venues where they further developed their stage show.[citation needed] The early line-up of the band changed often; Colin Burgess was the first member fired, and several bassists and drummers passed through the band during the next year.
By this time, Angus Young had adopted his characteristic school-uniform stage outfit. The idea was his sister Margaret's. Angus had tried other costumes, such as Spider-Man, Zorro, a gorilla, and a parody of Superman, named Super-Ang.[14] In fact in its early days, most members of the band dressed in some form of glam or satin outfit but this approach was abandoned when it was discovered Melbourne band Skyhooks had already adopted this approach to their stage presentation.
The Young brothers decided that Evans was not a suitable frontman for the group, because they felt he was more of a glam rocker like Gary Glitter.[21] On stage, Evans was occasionally replaced by the band's first manager, Dennis Laughlin, who was the original lead singer with Sherbet prior to Daryl Braithwaite joining the band. Evans did not get along with Laughlin, which also contributed to the band's ill feeling toward Evans.[21]
It was Gene Pierson who brokered the arrangement for Bon Scott from Fraternity to join them as lead singer. He was also instrumental in getting personal friend Ted Albert of Albert Productions to listen to AC/DC and arranged with programme manager Rod Muir of Australia’s biggest rock station 2SM to have them on the bill for one of their massive school holiday concerts back at Chequers which helped launch AC/DC's career and led to their being signed to the EMI-distributed Albert Productions label for Australia and New Zealand.[citation needed]

From the ground up. Grassroots