Oh jeez

your being far to P:C Regading the subject

Although i respect your angle as it doesnt directly antagonise nor offend

Look im a defender of the roots/culture to many forms of music ive grown up listening to and i love

Ive never been an Advocate of mediocritiy, I hate idiots, stupitidy, Nieviety, i loathe the Bandwidth that encapsulates everything about the commercial industry wherby its in essence not about your talent, And it matters none if its an electronic format

Me personally i believe liam howlett for example, "to be an electronic icon"

One which your statement regading medioicrity and in essence worthless trying to convince you imperfect at very least

Dont get me wrong, From a mathematical standpoint statistically your argument has weight

However i do believe that argument is clouded by arrogance to what true talents there are within an edm architechture

And no i dont mean 4/4 or commercial crap that gets played non stop i simply have used edm to mean anything thats made electronically

Which 99.9999999% of is Complete tripe

Within all genres of 70,2/50,z etc, theres a certain level of crap released, thats relative across the board musically, its not owned by the digital age

Theres a certain amount of shit within any style of music one has to sift through

"Now a clever rebutle would be to say well im having to sift through these words so yuh"

 

1824
number 1

number 2

number 3

number 4

 

I adore and strive for musical prowess, both within what i do, and what i draw from, but mostly my influences

simply that i write a genre from whats deemed unacceptable from what>>> the musical fraternity

cmon, open your mind

I will admit im awfully biased too

i agree

With 95%
just theres 5% of us that make a difference
And to make that difference you really need some skill

People cant just pick up a daw drag n drop a file/run midi data/ call themselves a musician

i play physical instruments, i play the freekn viola/cello/piano/i can drum like a mutha, not quite the late great travis hawkins, but not bad

Theres some of us that , not me, but theres some truly great electronic artists out here, that kinda dont deserve that slap in the face,

A great artist once said "Who gives a F## Who you are, why cant i write a track 20 mins long f### em i dont care if you dont respect it , coz im gonna make you listen


My thing is within the genres i do write that ive done for a long long time, it pains me to hear a genre that gets abused so much because theres almost no new ideas|!!

Of British origin, jungle/dnb/ all derivativs of it stem from a glorious age that most perhaps dont understand

And that that has gotten watered down with sub genres/sub sets of sub genres, like liquid, it shouldnt exist but does unfortunatly

Jump up, Teeney bopper dnb for the adolecent

so your right actually


as am i in that if one sifts thru the bullshit, and understand what theyre hearing, one will identify the real works of art not aimed at 15 yr old

"Whatever A n R guy dreamed that up needs shooting

It pains me because everything i hear bar a few outstanding releases, even to me sounds the damn same!!

so im in your corner also

Despite the rather obvious camouflaged insults

You guys should watch the BBC Documentary regarding DnB

If you do "Im right up there with what Goldie says about watering down dnb"

Only i apply that to every sub genre nearly

I only understand it the way i do becaus i was there, i lived the bloody craze for yonks and cut my virgin musical teeth on it prior to truly falling in love with the procces/Genre and i cant explain it but the truth is dnb is technically the most difficult electronic genre to attempt sound design and actually pull of a good worx without ridicule

thats 97

i was 20


I will further what i said by adding if you master the finer points of DnB production, and i mean true Uk, No watered down crap, , You truly can turn your hand to any Genre fact

Perhaps ive read comments the wrong way contextually, but im not stupid, i mean it wasnt in code,

Id hate to think im the antethesis of a couple things one could take offence to if indeed inclined

however im willing emulate a duck n let it roll straight off

 

Last edited: Jun 29, 2024

Almost kinda Clickey here of late

I dont conform to clicks or whats popular by definition of whats truly not,

sometimes it almost seems like many forum users either dont respect the process, or bash anything misunderstood

personally ive always been extremely open minded musically to any genre any era, 50,s 60,s70,s 80,s blah blah

Damn i adore northern soul/jazz/blues esspecially

 

Thats not what i took away from the remark but i dont blame you for saying that

There were good tracks/ actually no i will use the term rememberable, but for the majority percentage it was awfull musically

aside from nirvana, NiN, alanis morisette, prodigy, etc etc

"I shouldnt say prodigy because its more a liam howlett thing"

Dont laugh because i said alanis morisette, think of the drum work, vox, structure


theres others of course but my own personal fondness with the 90,z is not for the same reasons!!

 

For the record, I have nothing but negative feelings about the Zimmerization of modern movie scores, but "people trying to convince anyone it's the quintessence of human production" ? Really ??

This is not even a straw man, it's a straw army ffs

Btw, since Bernard Hermann is being discussed, here's a composition of his. Droning? Check. Textures? Check. Absence of memorable motifs, rhythms and melodies? Check.

He even re-hashed it for Taxi Driver, 30 years later

So EVERYTHING was better in 1924, according to you, eh?

If you prefer this :

to this :

...well, who am I to judge eh?

Or maybe, just maybe, they'd be amazed at the sonic explorations that modern composers are able to achieve. A composer, with one computer, has access to more aural, tonal and rhythmic possibilities than all the orchestras in 1924 combined.

 

A top 1924 film. Edit: didn't see Triggerfalinger's post until after my own....

 

Well no, not if you put it that way

 

I don't have anything against droning atonal scores at all, matter of fact I think that's Zimmer's best stuff... it's usually Hans's attempts to turn out anything resembling a traditional melody over more than 4 chords where he face plants.

And by no means because things were generally of a higher standard in ye olde days certainly does that mean that it was all of a high standard; there's always been crap and garbage and always will be.

 

Last edited: Jun 29, 2024

I've read a few pages of this thread and am delighted to share my thoughts. What are you even comparing here? Music is, first and foremost, the emotions it preserves, the vibe, if you will. The people who make this music, in whatever form, strive to convey their energy and emotions. Some succeed better than others.

To say that music was better back then is foolish. We live in an age of digital technology where one can create fascinating sounds and atmospheres without even leaving their chair.

I see no sense in insulting people who make music, because there will always be someone more talented or more beautiful than you.

 

yeah we need more snowboard docu movies...and even more reverb

 

are you talking about those long sustain low notes when something of great magnitude appears on screen?
that is terrible and so overused.
(zimmer started that with the tuba playing in Inception)

 

Realistically, regardless of what age anyone is or what musical tastes, or what styles/genres anyone likes, or what standards they have or do not have... this is the 100% TRUE REALITY with music as well.

Since music was first released 100 + years ago and even today, audiences and musicians alike have needed to sift through the music to find what they consider to be the 'gem' of the offerings. Music is like the frog prince. That almost says enough .

It is interesting reading up on how films were shown in theatres in this period. Musicians or a piano player were hired to provide all of the backing scene music live in the picture theatre for the silent films. There were no film scores per se when they started. I have heard people ask why, and while the obvious retort is to say that's why they called them silent films because there was no audio in the film.... you do not

No argument because since John Williams with only a very few exceptions, too much sounds regurgitated and in many, like pop music, all the same, even the instrumentation. As I mentioned to LoisLane above, the silent film period had live musicians in the theatres do all the music to provide moods. No room for pre-production and regurgitated garbage other than practice and a script to perform early into that period of film. Later, they were given chosen tunes to play apparently. No click tracks, just scene by scene performance, live.

@Lois Lane @triggerflipper - TRIVIA
We all know the same movie, same audio, same everything gets sent to theatres and TV worldwide. In the Silent film eras, reviews would apparently differ depending on how well the backing musicians live in the theatres performed dynamically and in context with the film. In those days as the historical documents state, it was pretty much a music live performance every time, and people always clapped or booed. It was an event. These days, you'd be told to shut up. Also, these days, too many things are codified. It was more like going to watch a Shakespearean play at West End or Broadway back then, based on historical documents.

 

Last edited by a moderator: Jun 30, 2024