Sharing your music.... When it's not very good

[vespers75]

I'll go back to my sister's example. I hear what she's doing, and knowing her, I have some idea of her stylistic intention. When she says she's done, I think to myself, 'No it's not!!' I don't actually hear it as artistically or aesthetically bad in any way but the technical details, generally: Unintentional dissonant notes, lack of transitions(mute/unmute), unexpressive(unautomated) melodic lines, sections that hold little reason to listen, icky mixing, etc. So the intention behind a work isn't bad. It's the execution that I typically find to be sub-standard. Basically, if she(and other artists like her) would just put in a bit more time and effort to shine up their piece, I wouldn't take issue in this way. Or conversely, to somehow make their intention match the seemingly lazy execution.

I have said many times over that the primary problem with DIY home studios is that the creative process of music and the technical process of engineering have become combined, requiring two competing skill sets from one person. Sometimes this works, but more often it doesn't...can't. So instead of concentrating on just the music, one has to also accomplish the substantial task of learning and using the information, knowledge and techniques that audio engineers spend years developing. It complicates the process of creating music and I suspect in many ways impedes the process. So now when a piece doesn't get finished, it can be creative or it can be technical...or both.

I don't agree much at all, I have faith in peoples ability to multitask and learn different skills. True it requires more work to take on both musicianing and engineering, but I don't see it as an insurmountable obstacle. There seem to be plenty of people who can handle both just fine.

Not really. Faith is not part of the equation. Multi-tasking is not the issue. Do you have any idea how many people never finish any songs, finish any mixes? A lot. And much of the music that gets shared isn't what it might have been aesthetically or technically. Insurmountable depends on how one sees the issues involved. Not saying it's wrong to try. If it's fun, do it, but when little gets completed it's good to wonder why. No?

I disagree with you, and perhaps you're thinking about yourself in the above statement to an extent. Conversely, there are many people...even here at KVR too, of course...that don't have the problems you're stating.

[debra1rlo]

I'll go back to my sister's example. I hear what she's doing, and knowing her, I have some idea of her stylistic intention. When she says she's done, I think to myself, 'No it's not!!' I don't actually hear it as artistically or aesthetically bad in any way but the technical details, generally: Unintentional dissonant notes, lack of transitions(mute/unmute), unexpressive(unautomated) melodic lines, sections that hold little reason to listen, icky mixing, etc. So the intention behind a work isn't bad. It's the execution that I typically find to be sub-standard. Basically, if she(and other artists like her) would just put in a bit more time and effort to shine up their piece, I wouldn't take issue in this way. Or conversely, to somehow make their intention match the seemingly lazy execution.

I have said many times over that the primary problem with DIY home studios is that the creative process of music and the technical process of engineering have become combined, requiring two competing skill sets from one person. Sometimes this works, but more often it doesn't...can't. So instead of concentrating on just the music, one has to also accomplish the substantial task of learning and using the information, knowledge and techniques that audio engineers spend years developing. It complicates the process of creating music and I suspect in many ways impedes the process. So now when a piece doesn't get finished, it can be creative or it can be technical...or both.

I don't agree much at all, I have faith in peoples ability to multitask and learn different skills. True it requires more work to take on both musicianing and engineering, but I don't see it as an insurmountable obstacle. There seem to be plenty of people who can handle both just fine.

Not really. Faith is not part of the equation. Multi-tasking is not the issue. Do you have any idea how many people never finish any songs, finish any mixes? A lot. And much of the music that gets shared isn't what it might have been aesthetically or technically. Insurmountable depends on how one sees the issues involved. Not saying it's wrong to try. If it's fun, do it, but when little gets completed it's good to wonder why. No?

Do you know how many people pay their bills late and miss appointments? some people just don't follow up whether it be music or their day job... if they don't finish them and share them, we don't hear them... so on this topic, i think that argument would be somewhat invalid as we're talking about music that is shared, not music that never sees the light of day... irrelevance... ALL composers have crap songs that never see the light of day, ed.

[Arglebargle]

I'll go back to my sister's example. I hear what she's doing, and knowing her, I have some idea of her stylistic intention. When she says she's done, I think to myself, 'No it's not!!' I don't actually hear it as artistically or aesthetically bad in any way but the technical details, generally: Unintentional dissonant notes, lack of transitions(mute/unmute), unexpressive(unautomated) melodic lines, sections that hold little reason to listen, icky mixing, etc. So the intention behind a work isn't bad. It's the execution that I typically find to be sub-standard. Basically, if she(and other artists like her) would just put in a bit more time and effort to shine up their piece, I wouldn't take issue in this way. Or conversely, to somehow make their intention match the seemingly lazy execution.

I have said many times over that the primary problem with DIY home studios is that the creative process of music and the technical process of engineering have become combined, requiring two competing skill sets from one person. Sometimes this works, but more often it doesn't...can't. So instead of concentrating on just the music, one has to also accomplish the substantial task of learning and using the information, knowledge and techniques that audio engineers spend years developing. It complicates the process of creating music and I suspect in many ways impedes the process. So now when a piece doesn't get finished, it can be creative or it can be technical...or both.

I don't agree much at all, I have faith in peoples ability to multitask and learn different skills. True it requires more work to take on both musicianing and engineering, but I don't see it as an insurmountable obstacle. There seem to be plenty of people who can handle both just fine.

Not really. Faith is not part of the equation. Multi-tasking is not the issue. Do you have any idea how many people never finish any songs, finish any mixes? A lot. And much of the music that gets shared isn't what it might have been aesthetically or technically. Insurmountable depends on how one sees the issues involved. Not saying it's wrong to try. If it's fun, do it, but when little gets completed it's good to wonder why. No?

Plenty of people seem to handle both aspects just fine. You're free to think what you want but it seems kind of elitist to say people should choose one or the other. My opinion is the kind of people who like to do both are the kind of folks who enjoy doing everything themselves and don't want to trust their work to others. Another thing is, many people who get into home recording are already skilled musicians, so they've already got that down. So no, I think the opinion that people should choose musicianing or engineering is a bit foolish, if they want to do both.

[Hink]

I'll go back to my sister's example. I hear what she's doing, and knowing her, I have some idea of her stylistic intention. When she says she's done, I think to myself, 'No it's not!!' I don't actually hear it as artistically or aesthetically bad in any way but the technical details, generally: Unintentional dissonant notes, lack of transitions(mute/unmute), unexpressive(unautomated) melodic lines, sections that hold little reason to listen, icky mixing, etc. So the intention behind a work isn't bad. It's the execution that I typically find to be sub-standard. Basically, if she(and other artists like her) would just put in a bit more time and effort to shine up their piece, I wouldn't take issue in this way. Or conversely, to somehow make their intention match the seemingly lazy execution.

I have said many times over that the primary problem with DIY home studios is that the creative process of music and the technical process of engineering have become combined, requiring two competing skill sets from one person. Sometimes this works, but more often it doesn't...can't. So instead of concentrating on just the music, one has to also accomplish the substantial task of learning and using the information, knowledge and techniques that audio engineers spend years developing. It complicates the process of creating music and I suspect in many ways impedes the process. So now when a piece doesn't get finished, it can be creative or it can be technical...or both.

I don't agree much at all, I have faith in peoples ability to multitask and learn different skills. True it requires more work to take on both musicianing and engineering, but I don't see it as an insurmountable obstacle. There seem to be plenty of people who can handle both just fine.

the problem comes down to thinking models, we have creative thinking and critical thinking. The problem is the polarization of the two, I'm thinking I dont have to say for the most part I'm a creative thinker, I was raised by a critical thinker. But the goal is not to be one or the other, the goals is to be a productive thinker.

Sometimes one has to develop tools to switch between the two, I have heard many writers say they do not change their work area because it kicks i the creative thinking when they sit down to write. I do this myself.

However there are times that I have to learn something or do work on my studio that requires critical thinking. The tool I developed to switch my mind set for critical work is simple, I play a few games of chess. It's simply not a case of either/or and I agree with you that if someone can't accomplish both perhaps instead of saying it can't be done that person should accept that maybe it's their problem, not a universal one.

[eduardo_b]

i think he meant "do some actual research for a change instead of stating opinion as fact as you do so often. you may want to google [the history of the recording studio], spend several months reading everything you can, and then come back" or something similar.

Been there, done that. Anyone who wants insights into these topics can read the monthly articles in Sound On Sound about how and why engineers do what they do and how mixes by non-engineers are fixed. The problem isn't the tools available for home studios. It's the knowledge of how to use them, which is quite separate from the creative process of music itself. Try reading the many articles in TapeOp regarding artists and engineers. I've been interested in this topic for many years. My opinions are the result of all the knowledge (facts, if you like) I have acquired in the process.

There's certainly no shortage of opinions on kvr.

[Arglebargle]

I'll go back to my sister's example. I hear what she's doing, and knowing her, I have some idea of her stylistic intention. When she says she's done, I think to myself, 'No it's not!!' I don't actually hear it as artistically or aesthetically bad in any way but the technical details, generally: Unintentional dissonant notes, lack of transitions(mute/unmute), unexpressive(unautomated) melodic lines, sections that hold little reason to listen, icky mixing, etc. So the intention behind a work isn't bad. It's the execution that I typically find to be sub-standard. Basically, if she(and other artists like her) would just put in a bit more time and effort to shine up their piece, I wouldn't take issue in this way. Or conversely, to somehow make their intention match the seemingly lazy execution.

I have said many times over that the primary problem with DIY home studios is that the creative process of music and the technical process of engineering have become combined, requiring two competing skill sets from one person. Sometimes this works, but more often it doesn't...can't. So instead of concentrating on just the music, one has to also accomplish the substantial task of learning and using the information, knowledge and techniques that audio engineers spend years developing. It complicates the process of creating music and I suspect in many ways impedes the process. So now when a piece doesn't get finished, it can be creative or it can be technical...or both.

I don't agree much at all, I have faith in peoples ability to multitask and learn different skills. True it requires more work to take on both musicianing and engineering, but I don't see it as an insurmountable obstacle. There seem to be plenty of people who can handle both just fine.

the problem comes down to thinking models, we have creative thinking and critical thinking. The problem is the polarization of the two, I'm thinking I dont have to say for the most part I'm a creative thinker, I was raised by a critical thinker. But the goal is not to be one or the other, the goals is to be a productive thinker.

Sometimes one has to develop tools to switch between the two, I have heard many writers say they do not change their work area because it kicks i the creative thinking when they sit down to write. I do this myself.

However there are times that I have to learn something or do work on my studio that requires critical thinking. The tool I developed to switch my mind set for critical work is simple, I play a few games of chess. It's simply not a case of either/or and I agree with you that if someone can't accomplish both perhaps instead of saying it can't be done that person should accept that maybe it's their problem, not a universal one.

I agree, some people can handle flipping between creative and technical mindsets more easily than others. No doubt that it requires dedication and practice, which not everyone is willing to put in. I don't think it should stop one from giving it a go, if one is interested in wearing both hats.

[vurt]

i think he meant "do some actual research for a change instead of stating opinion as fact as you do so often. you may want to google [the history of the recording studio], spend several months reading everything you can, and then come back" or something similar.

Been there, done that. Anyone who wants insights into these topics can read the monthly articles in Sound On Sound about how and why engineers do what they do and how mixes by non-engineers are fixed. The problem isn't the tools available for home studios. It's the knowledge of how to use them, which is quite separate from the creative process of music itself. Try reading the many articles in TapeOp regarding artists and engineers. I've been interested in this topic for many years. My opinions are the result of all the knowledge (facts, if you like) I have acquired in the process.

There's certainly no shortage of opinions on kvr.

if you had done anything other than selective research you wouldnt have such a polarised view of what "should" be.

[eduardo_b]

Do you know how many people pay their bills late and miss appointments? some people just don't follow up whether it be music or their day job... if they don't finish them and share them, we don't hear them... so on this topic, i think that argument would be somewhat invalid as we're talking about music that is shared, not music that never sees the light of day... irrelevance... ALL composers have crap songs that never see the light of day, ed.

Music that is never finished doesn't get shared, does it. Wasn't the OP saying nothing he has is ready for this kind of scrutiny? Could be technical issues...maybe not. Whatever.

[Arglebargle]

i think he meant "do some actual research for a change instead of stating opinion as fact as you do so often. you may want to google [the history of the recording studio], spend several months reading everything you can, and then come back" or something similar.

Been there, done that. Anyone who wants insights into these topics can read the monthly articles in Sound On Sound about how and why engineers do what they do and how mixes by non-engineers are fixed. The problem isn't the tools available for home studios. It's the knowledge of how to use them, which is quite separate from the creative process of music itself. Try reading the many articles in TapeOp regarding artists and engineers. I've been interested in this topic for many years. My opinions are the result of all the knowledge (facts, if you like) I have acquired in the process.

There's certainly no shortage of opinions on kvr.

To be fair though, you have to acknowledge the bias of professional engineers, who wish to maintain their jobs in the face of the threat from home studios. So of course they will tell you that you have to keep the engineering process separate.

[vurt]

i think he meant "do some actual research for a change instead of stating opinion as fact as you do so often. you may want to google [the history of the recording studio], spend several months reading everything you can, and then come back" or something similar.

Been there, done that. Anyone who wants insights into these topics can read the monthly articles in Sound On Sound about how and why engineers do what they do and how mixes by non-engineers are fixed. The problem isn't the tools available for home studios. It's the knowledge of how to use them, which is quite separate from the creative process of music itself. Try reading the many articles in TapeOp regarding artists and engineers. I've been interested in this topic for many years. My opinions are the result of all the knowledge (facts, if you like) I have acquired in the process.

There's certainly no shortage of opinions on kvr.

To be fair though, you have to acknowledge the bias of professional engineers, who wish to maintain their jobs in the face of the threat from home studios. So of course they will tell you that you have to keep the engineering process separate.

theyre not biased, they know best!

[MOK19]

You guys sure are getting vicious, and for the purposes of the topic at hand, I cannot see why.

[Arglebargle]

i think he meant "do some actual research for a change instead of stating opinion as fact as you do so often. you may want to google [the history of the recording studio], spend several months reading everything you can, and then come back" or something similar.

Been there, done that. Anyone who wants insights into these topics can read the monthly articles in Sound On Sound about how and why engineers do what they do and how mixes by non-engineers are fixed. The problem isn't the tools available for home studios. It's the knowledge of how to use them, which is quite separate from the creative process of music itself. Try reading the many articles in TapeOp regarding artists and engineers. I've been interested in this topic for many years. My opinions are the result of all the knowledge (facts, if you like) I have acquired in the process.

There's certainly no shortage of opinions on kvr.

To be fair though, you have to acknowledge the bias of professional engineers, who wish to maintain their jobs in the face of the threat from home studios. So of course they will tell you that you have to keep the engineering process separate.

theyre not biased, they know best!

I don't really blame them for being biased, they've got a career to maintain. I'm sure they're worried about the surge of home studios, all that's required now is the skill and the professional engineer is out a job. By the same token though you can't ignore their slant on how they think things should be done.

[eduardo_b]

i think he meant "do some actual research for a change instead of stating opinion as fact as you do so often. you may want to google [the history of the recording studio], spend several months reading everything you can, and then come back" or something similar.

Been there, done that. Anyone who wants insights into these topics can read the monthly articles in Sound On Sound about how and why engineers do what they do and how mixes by non-engineers are fixed. The problem isn't the tools available for home studios. It's the knowledge of how to use them, which is quite separate from the creative process of music itself. Try reading the many articles in TapeOp regarding artists and engineers. I've been interested in this topic for many years. My opinions are the result of all the knowledge (facts, if you like) I have acquired in the process.

There's certainly no shortage of opinions on kvr.

if you had done anything other than selective research you wouldnt have such a polarised view of what "should" be.

Selective research? I only noted a couple of examples, but there are dozens beyond this. Plus my own experience. By your definition, if I am getting the inference you're making, conclusions are polarised views. Aren't all opinions conclusions of some sort? And there is no "should be" in any of this. Just the observation that the time and effort for both music and production are significant for each, and they are separate endeavors. Apparently you and others disagree. It's just discussion to me.

[debra1rlo]

Do you know how many people pay their bills late and miss appointments? some people just don't follow up whether it be music or their day job... if they don't finish them and share them, we don't hear them... so on this topic, i think that argument would be somewhat invalid as we're talking about music that is shared, not music that never sees the light of day... irrelevance... ALL composers have crap songs that never see the light of day, ed.

Music that is never finished doesn't get shared, does it. Wasn't the OP saying nothing he has is ready for this kind of scrutiny? Could be technical issues...maybe not. Whatever.

Well, then he should do what any musician who is concerned about the quality of the whole package... play it for other musicians and if possible, anyone that does pro sound and get criticism. i can relate, always wanting things to be "perfect" before sharing stuff, i think it's some of that with the OP, but at some point you have to get another set of ears on it. That IS what the pros do, right? I seem to remember reading that mantra more than once... Preferably you find someone who is like minded enough to appreciate what you're going for but neutral enough to offer constructive criticism on all aspects of the song.

[Hink]

You guys sure are getting vicious, and for the purposes of the topic at hand, I cannot see why.

I dont think it's vicious at all, I think when someone comes into a forum like this and says most people cannot do what KvR is all about many people will take exception. Rightfully so imo.

I think this thread is awesome and I for one thank you for posting it