No, thanks, I'll just buy the instrument.

[Hovmod]

My biggest regret is not learning an instrument properly. I feel deeply that what I'm doing now, with synths and VSTs and midi keyboards and piano rolls is fake, cheating, petty theft of a field I admire more than anything. I don't concider the music I make worthy of being called music. There should be a different word for it, like what I'm typing now isn't comparable to literature.
That said, I'm having a lot of fun, and thanks to the internet a few other people are enjoying what I do as well. Or they claim to on friendly boards...
One thing I have noticed however, is that no matter how carefully I work on a part using piano rolls and midi and clicking in parts and tweaking and quantizing and all the work that goes into it, it gets nowhere near what I can accomplish with a real bass, a real guitar and whatever other real instruments I've got around the place. The sense of achievement (and secret, stolen pride) I get from having a bass part or a guitar solo in a song outweighs the inaccuracies it automatically inserts. And the songs sound better, too.
This applies only to me and my music and my mind. What you might feel and think and prefer is entirely up to you. But one thing is beyond discussion: Actually being able to play an instrument is an art, a skill that needs constant attention and hard work, and is not comparable to learning how to match beats or download a soundfont. Don't kid yourselves.

[braj]

But one thing is beyond discussion: Actually being able to play an instrument is an art, a skill that needs constant attention and hard work, and is not comparable to learning how to match beats or download a soundfont. Don't kid yourselves.

No doubt.

[respirator]

The acoustic instruments we know today were developed to provide loudness, to be heard. Our forefathers lived with the increasingly technical difficulty of playing these instruments (compare a recorder to a sax). Today this technical challenge has become equal with musicianship. That’s a real shame. Music is not in a technical difficult instrument. Music is not in through training as an opera singer being able to fill the Met with your voice. Musicality is in my opinion in awareness. Awareness to the sounds that surround us, to playing with other people. Sure, technical proficiency can be of great help, but to confuse it for musicality is a mistake. You could argue that a technical difficult instrument such as the violin provides greater means of expression. But you could also argue that the technical training of traditional instruments is a way to conformity and conservatism. Truly great musicians are often masters of their instruments (though not necessarily in a technically sense) but masters of instruments are not always great musicians. This is especially true when it comes to musical creation as opposed to musical recreation or interpretation.

Enough ramble. What I wanted to say: Why would you want a strummed guitar if you’re making synthesized or computer based music? If you don’t play the guitar, don’t. Use your imagination and create unheard sounds. A good microphone and the stuff the surrounds can make surprisingly musical sounds and textures, that doesn’t sound like some music school wannabe strumming away in the local guitar shop. A guitar can even make interesting noises when you can’t play it (sometimes way more interesting than when the player knows a little). Same goes for many instruments.

I’m not advocating musical illiteracy. But instead of reiterating musical clichés (this tune needs a strummed guitar) then go for the unheard, unthinkable, unorthodox.

(Disclaimer: I’m a guitarist who's learning to use the computer as a musical environment).

[porpoise]

HI

As someone who has a guitar sitting in the corner but not being able to get anything much out of it I find 'Gregs' thoughts interesting - I have wrote some nice (keyboard input)lead guitar parts and people think they sound just dandy - but reflecting on the strumming thing - I compose a lot of reggae and I use the keyboard to play strummed rythem guitar and TBH anyone who is into reggae would tell you that playing 'tight' rythem guitar is a bit more than plain strumming, I would struggle beyond an acceptable level to pull it off, NO - I just could not do it, I would need to spend a year of intensive practice as Reggae guitar chopping is a bloomin art, at an advanced level it also includes slides, picking and a variety of other techniques.

I am not 'challenging' anyone - I wish I had the time to learn the axe well enough to play what my mind was demanding!

The interesting thing about Reggae is that quite often the rythmic chord structure is mimicked by several instruments and invariably I will also play the same chords on my keyboard using a piano/organ patch, so in my case playing guitar chops has almost 'Naturally' become the keyboard - perhaps the nearest comparison would be jimmy page playing the violin on his guitar?

It's all interesting stuff, many electronic composers (I use the term generously!) are probably quite usefull with a keyboard - but then again I know people who make a very healthy living from music and in any given situation could not even jam with a couple of 'musicians', let alone play from a piece of sheet music; BUT you or me could not hope to emulate the sheer creative collage that makes up their average commercial track - perhaps 'musicianship' itself get's in the way of the creative process, certainly history is full of great musicians that had a level of frustration within that ultimately led to self destruction; due to an inability to get their ideas/thought/emotions out?

Who knows perhaps a sampler a few samples and some creative juice flowing is all it takes (for some) to express themselves in a satisfactory way - have I gone off-topic?

Bottom line is - 'Every man do his thing a little way different'.

Porpoise.

[Lunch Money]

[edit: my post was a response to respirator. Other response to follow!]

Excellent points. If you don't need a guitar, certainly don't use it simply because it seems like you should.

On the other hand, I've always felt it dangerous and pointless to dismiss techniques out of hand in the pure pursuit of making something 'unique'. A lot of the songs that move me have a lot in common with other songs... they might feature a good vocalist singing in a Western scale. Or they might feature expressive (or aggressive!!) guitarists playing basic scales and riffs in the Pentatonic scale.

When I abandon my guitar, I have a hell of a lot of fun, and I feel excited by the art that I create. But I'm also not afraid to use a I-IV-V progression and a pentatonic scale if that's what suits me and suits the song. A musical cliché is only a cliché if it's trite and inappropriate. Going for the unheard and unorthodox is rapidly becoming the newest cliché, I'm afraid.

I can listen to a song, and it could be unique and unheard, but if it doesn't move me, what good is it to me? I don't mean typical 'moving' sentimentality, either, though I don't exclude it. I also include the excitement of hearing a structure that breaks tradition but in a creative way. Or a sound that freaks me out because I 'understand' what it represents even though I've never heard it before. Perhaps the composer has made me feel a genuine sense of discomfort. That's moving me, too! But if I hear a song that does nothing for me, it's completely insignificant and irrelevant if it's "unique".

Or, the short version:

In order to be truly open minded, you ALSO can't shut out the possibility that the strummed guitar IS what the song requires!

[Lunch Money]

porpoise-- it's a good point. I'm a guitarist, have been for years, but I'm not into reggae. However, the occasional mood strikes me and I try to play some reggae and can't pull it off. It's truly a tricky one. I can't imagine it being easy on guitar OR on keyboard.

Musicianship can certainly be counter to musicality, though. I think of Al DiMeola.

Greg

[nocompromise]

porpoise-- it's a good point. I'm a guitarist, have been for years, but I'm not into reggae. However, the occasional mood strikes me and I try to play some reggae and can't pull it off. It's truly a tricky one. I can't imagine it being easy on guitar OR on keyboard.
Greg

Having produced the odd reggae album or two and done an awfull lot of live reggae recordings....
its not actually difficult at all. Its like blues or the rolling stones. its simply a live performance.
having said that, i suppose it might prove difficult psycologically to get into the right 'headspace' for it. And no being stoned has nothing to do with it.
Just play the skank. Feel the rhythm.
Mind you it is a lot easier if you're playing in a live band. How about jamming along to a trk in ur DAW and recording multiple passes to get the idea.
Also remember that (for the most part and no insult intended) reggae guitarists aren't that good technically.
Lastly, and i think you know this already (?), you certainly won't be able to do it if you think you can't!
Don't really know why I'm being so helpfull today.

[Lunch Money]

I think it helps to have the right rhythm section in order to get into the skank. It's the drum and beat that you're playing against that make the skank.

[Warmonger]

There's too many long-ass posts in this thread for me to read them all, so I'll just chime in with my simple answer to the original question. In my case, I'm just too poor to buy any of the instruments I want, so I have no choice but to emulate them, or in the worst case, think of a different instrument (with a corresponding new part to fit the new sound).

It's because of this that I've been somewhat forced into electronic music. I already have the computer, so it's just a $200 investment in the keyboard, plus whatever I can afford in software (which is not very much). With the stuff I have, I know I can't create a hit rock song, so I don't even try. When I do, I'll just stick to simple stuff that can be done easily on the keyboard, with little effort.

I have a roommate who has a guitar, and I've picked it up and played a couple times. I can play a couple of very simple parts of songs on it, and I'd even say it sounds decent. However, with just as little experience, I can do much more interesting stuff sequencing, although there's no question that it sounds more artificial. To me, the underlying melody and harmony is more important than the aspects of an individual performance, so the complete lack of humanity in a 100% quantized guitar riff doesn't bother me too much.

edit: That turned out a lot longer than I thought it would be!

[nocompromise]

I think it helps to have the right rhythm section in order to get into the skank. It's the drum and beat that you're playing against that make the skank.

don't i just know it

[headquest]

Greg

[edited for one typo and one unclear statement]

The Secretary of State for Grammar is back!!

When I was studying at music college, I specialised in Early Music, and there are some interesting analogies to what you are talking about in your interesting post. Most obviously, on the harpsichord, chords are nearly always "strummed" - or spread, to use the correct terminology for harpsichord playing.

The reason for this is that through the C16th, the harpsichord repertoire grew up alongside that of the Lute. FOr example,Chambonieres (the father of the French baroque harpsichord movement) was deliberately immitating the sound of the Lute (which is the forebear of the guitar, of course) in his music. This actually worked both ways...

Zooming forward to the late C19th, the Spanish composer Albeniz was first and foremost a concert pianist who travelled Europe dazzling audiences with his virtuosity. To show this off to the full, and to help establish his homeland on the musical map of the day, he wrote his own piano piece, many of which were subsequently transcribed for Guitar (mostly by Segovia) and are now some of the most famous pieces in the classical guitar repertoire.

I think that this kind of creative sharing of ideas and techniques runs throughout music history, and is basically nothing new.

In the current day, the issue is no longer whether or not it is "right" for musicians to do this. The fact is that as technology progresses, lifelike emulations of acoustic sound are increaingly possible using electronic means, and many composers find this opens up new possibilities which help them in their creative process.

I don't think we can stop that. But I do think - and I agree with you here - that we should do all we can to also preserve the original acoustic instruments and encourage their use wherever possible and appropriate.

[nocompromise]

In my case, I'm just too poor to buy any of the instruments I want, so I have no choice but to emulate them, or in the worst case, think of a different instrument (with a corresponding new part to fit the new sound).

Whats the whole point then? Are you trying to emulate real musicians or make good music? If its the latter then think yourself lucky.
You've just saved yourself the vast time and expense learning how to play an instrument properly. You don't have to take vast quantities of drugs and waste $100,000s on studio time trying not to sound like yourself or your last hit - even though the record company want that. You also don't have to face the problem of not being able to play something simple and unique because you are too good!
You can do what you want. Enjoy the freedom.

[Warmonger]

I consider myself a composer (really a producer, but composer sounds better ), not a performer, if that answers your question.

[nocompromise]

Well thats the point then. You don't need to concern yourself with that stuff then.

[respirator]

... I've always felt it dangerous and pointless to dismiss techniques out of hand in the pure pursuit of making something 'unique'. A lot of the songs that move me have a lot in common with other songs... they might feature a good vocalist singing in a Western scale. Or they might feature expressive (or aggressive!!) guitarists playing basic scales and riffs in the Pentatonic scale.

In fact I agree to some extent on this. Some of the most touching and beautiful music in the last ten years for me is Cash's American Recordings. Not much experiment going on there... Not even good guitar playing (talk about strumming). But lets face it: There aren't many Johnny Cashes around KvR There are loads of talent and creativity though, but often I feel that the creativity is hindered by tradition and conservatism.

When I abandon my guitar, I have a hell of a lot of fun, and I feel excited by the art that I create. But I'm also not afraid to use a I-IV-V progression and a pentatonic scale if that's what suits me and suits the song. A musical cliché is only a cliché if it's trite and inappropriate. Going for the unheard and unorthodox is rapidly becoming the newest cliché, I'm afraid.

Again I understand what you're saying. Knowing your instrument (including the computer) enables you to use old and tried formulas in musically satisfying ways. But I think that a musical cliché needs to be more than not trite or appropriate. It has to be delivered with great skill and emotion. Experiments on the other hand, and this is esp. true for the listening musicians, can be interesting because they can show us new ways (or as is often the case, blind alleys) without being the result of musical mastership. But still, I listen to Cash repeatedly and most experiments once or twice.

I can listen to a song, and it could be unique and unheard, but if it doesn't move me, what good is it to me? ... if I hear a song that does nothing for me, it's completely insignificant and irrelevant if it's "unique".

Here we disagree. For me as a musician listening to music is two separate things: I listen to music just for enjoyment (and that is increasingly difficult as I tend to analyze and listen to separate instruments and elements) and I listen to music to widen my horizon. (Music as backdrop, e.g. letting the radio run while doing something else, doesn't work for me, I get annoyed and loses focus). Music doesn't have to move me in an emotional sense to be interesting. Intellectual challenging music is just as good. But music that is “nice” or emulation without emotion... nah.

(Great thread. Incredible difficult to put in to words).