I've "dabbled" in electronica myself and gotten pretty
tired of it. Sure, pushing buttons can accomplish fast
results. With the invention of MC-303, etc. anyone (and
I mean ANYONE) who can count 4/4ths can create cool
tracks and play around with technological sound. What
I couldn't get from my dabbling was the feeling of
actually creating something worthwhile. Being creative
and communicating a message, a feeling, an impression
is important to me as a human being and songwriter.
But it wasn't a human creating the music - it was a
lifeless, cold, metallic box. Even with techniques
like Physical Modelling, we've come nowhere near
recreating the sound of a muted trumpet solo, the
detailed resonnance of an old jazz guitar.
Don't get me wrong guys&gals; technological music was evolved
immensely, but why does it always cater to its own audience?
What is lacking that is holding it off the charts? Bands
like Jamiroquai or BNH are commercially oriented, sure,
but they haven't let techology take over - and I think
that is part of their general appeal.
People like to be able to identify with what they hear or see.
That's easier when the music allows room for reflection and
afterthought, when you can feel that it has organic, human -
intellectual - content, not when it's just organized sound
created by a machine.
-Anders
********************************
mail: ahamre@mail.hf.uio.no
web: http://www.uio.no/~ahamre/
********************************
On Mon, 9 Mar 1998, Michael Aregood wrote:
> I'm not sure but I think it means that the people who play traditional
> instruments have all gone to ivy league schools and are therefore much
> smarter than their less fortunate counterparts who dabble in
> electronica... =)