Get off my lawn!

[whyterabbyt]

But all of the disrespect that I see toward traditional musicians (of which I am one) by people who like to 'kick guitars around the floor' so to speak, tends to make me feel like a bit of a chump for trying to be tolerant and understanding of the 'guitar-kicker' school of musicians.

i dont know where you're seeing that disrespect, but its always appeared to me that the 'guitar-kickers' here, at KVR, have always been the most tolerant of other musical approaches.

if you were reading some sort of disrespect into what robojam said, i'd suggest that's a mistake on your part. if its a more general comment, I can only say, anecdotally, that my own experience doesn't reflect that. Equally anecdotally, I have, however, noticed that defending the 'guitar kicking' approach is often taken as an attack on 'traditional' approaches, without it ever being so.

[robogone]

Yes, I didn't actually say that either approach made someone more or less of a musician, so I don't know where that came from.

[ntom]

Equally anecdotally, I have, however, noticed that defending the 'guitar kicking' approach is often taken as an attack on 'traditional' approaches, without it ever being so.

I can agree with this.

[filkertom]

As for popular music, Every once in a blue moon something smart comes along that really perks up my ears. The thing is now I'll most likely not hear it to perk up my ears. I'm not looking for it or waiting for it or bothering with the barrage of crap to find it anymore. I just don't care. The time I spend listening to music is better served making it.


Most of the biab users groups and forums are filled with those in their 70's and 80's. I made a joke about the old men of biab. I'm 50 and use it everyday. It turned out that quite a number of people of all ages use the program. Which kind of shocked me and gave me hope. While biab is good for many types of music it really shines for jazz.

I'm 52, and I use BIAB all the time as well. It is indeed very jazz-centric, but they've been slowly rocking it up; the newest edition, which can use VSTs with the MIDI and comes with a version of Amplitube, is just great.

I try not to be much of an old fogey, and I'm hoping that my use of Alchemy Player, BFD, Rhino, Amplitube, and Garritan Instant Orchestra helps on that score (pun intended). I'm also getting some very nice effects with Magnus Choir and Spicy Guitar, and I'm doing my best to figure out the depths of Reaper....

[deathwish]

I wasn't necessarily offended by his response to me, and I know you love me, but sorry, friend, I'm not backing your fight up. I was just curious what the thoughts are on those who can't play instruments.

you dont' need to know how to play an instrument to create good music.

[robogone]

Looks like the majority are in agreement with that

[Vintage73]

I think we're missing something...

No, you don't need to know how to play an instrument to make great RECORDED music. Or you could be fully self-taught.

BUT...

If you're going to play LIVE, you should know how to play your instrument (however you need to use it to make the sounds you want).

In other words, to be a PERFORMER, you need to know your instrument.

I'd hate to go to a concert just to find out that the person that's making noise on stage has no idea what they're doing in order to make the sounds that I want to hear.

[debra1rlo]

Live v. recorded:meh, i used to care but now i just wanna be entertained. i wanna see someone kick someone else's guitar around. without the other person's permission. take that vurt. and mike ness

[ntom]

I think we're missing something...

No, you don't need to know how to play an instrument to make great RECORDED music. Or you could be fully self-taught.

BUT...

If you're going to play LIVE, you should know how to play your instrument (however you need to use it to make the sounds you want).

In other words, to be a PERFORMER, you need to know your instrument.

I'd hate to go to a concert just to find out that the person that's making noise on stage has no idea what they're doing in order to make the sounds that I want to hear.

Well...what about a lot of electronic artists today that play live....dare I say it? Deadmau5?
How about a better example. Oliver Huntermann - granted a smaller name artist..in fact it was a fairly recent topic here that introduced me to him, but, he doesn't play an instrument but he does a performance that's a little bit more than just turning a few knobs (just a little bit)

edit
believe me, I would love to do anything I could to put on some sort of public performance of my music, but I feel there are only very limited ways of doing a performance of my music. One of being the Reactable, which I would LOVE to have one, but they cost as much as a car, PLUS, it's Mac only, which I don't have a Mac.

[herodotus]

As you're quoting me I assume you're asking those questions in response to that statement, so I'm a little confused as I neither called anyone an idiot or said that they're full of shit

I know. It seemed to me that you were implying it, though.

I actually said I don't attach importance to whether they can play or not i.e. both cases are valid as far as being a musician is concerned. Prompted by hearing the oft quoted "at least they can play their instruments"

I'm sorry. To me, 'I just don't attach any value to the perceived ability to play an instrument or not' sounds like a dismissal of those who learn to play their instruments well. Just as 'I just don't attach any value to the perceived ability to do math problems or not' sounds like a dismissal of the importance of math education. If you were merely stating a 'live and let live' sort of position, then I misapprehended you.

Who cares? If there's an audience for it does it really matter how much technical ability was involved? I think I sit on both sides of the fence - there are some instruments I've put a lot of effort into learning and wish I could play a lot better, but on the other hand I have a huge appreciation for unconventional approaches to making music.

I too appreciate unconventional approaches to music (and I don't really care if it has an audience, either). I appreciate such approaches much more than, say, impeccably executed solos in a eighties metal song. But over the years I have encountered large numbers of people who have a sort of reverse snobbery regarding those who have taken the time to learn an instrument. Rock journalism is full of this snobbery. It goes hand in hand with the widespread dismissal of all prog rock and jazz fusion as mere 'wankery'.

Again, if this is not your position, forgive my misapprehension.

My point was that really it doesn't matter and it achieves nothing if we judge those with a restrictive view of how others should make music.

I don't have any desire to restrict anything, but I don't know why so many feel the need to respond to obvious playing ability with a pugnacious sort of 'so what?'. Playing an instrument well doesn't make you a musical genius, or even creative, but it is an accomplishment.

This is how I have always taken the phrase 'at least they can play their instruments': if you see two bands, both equally boring, and one of them are in tune and in sync with each other, while the other is not, I for one will probably prefer the one that is in tune. This isn't any sort of judgement of the ages; just a sort of quick, short hand assessment:

(boring + competent) > (boring + incompetent)

if you were reading some sort of disrespect into what robojam said, i'd suggest that's a mistake on your part.

Perhaps. I addressed this above.

if its a more general comment, I can only say, anecdotally, that my own experience doesn't reflect that. Equally anecdotally, I have, however, noticed that defending the 'guitar kicking' approach is often taken as an attack on 'traditional' approaches, without it ever being so.

It depends on the circle that you are in. I remember many a thread where I ended up firmly on the side of the experimental (i.e. the 'guitar kicker') approach to music against middlebrow detractors like eduardo_b, because the middlebrow detractors were being so obtuse. But if you really haven't seen any journalists cruelly dismissing prog rock or jazz fusion in the name of the Velvet Underground and Blue Cheer, I can throw about 1000 links your way (though I'd rather not, as it would be an infuriating task). Growing up playing in our little punk rock scene allowed me to see a lot of this kind of kind of intolerance first hand.

So as I said, I'm sorry if my beer-soaked brain (mmm....Warsteiner.....mmmmm) saw some implied intolerance where it didn't exist. It doesn't seem all that outlandish an interpretation of

I just don't attach any value to the perceived ability to play an instrument

but I will certainly concede that I might have been mistaken.

This is music people, not politics. Can't we all just get along?

except artists who get radio play?

Well, that's a tricky issue. I wouldn't want to assert that everyone on the radio must die, because some perfectly decent musicians get on the radio (I mean, I just heard Louis Armstrong on the radio this morning, and he certainly didn't deserve to die).

But of the musicians who do deserve to die, almost all of them are on the radio.

hmmmm....

Perhaps I'll work up a venn diagram later on.

[tapper mike]

Nothing like reversing yourself in your final statement. Apparently enough people heard the value of what they do to make them a success. Perhaps you would prefer it if no one was ever successful for their efforts. Pro athletes so what, skilled doctors who cares.

Success is a byproduct not an end product of doing something well. The end product is doing it well even if what you do best is marketing.

So you don't like radio... Do what I did. Turn it off. As ratings drop and interest fades radio will need to find away to bring back revenue streams that pay their bills. Maybe they'll change format to something you like, Maybe not. Maybe you are the only person who likes what you like. Promoting the positive is much more effective then finding the negative. If you like peace it's more productive to be pro peace then anti-war.

[whyterabbyt]

But if you really haven't seen any journalists cruelly dismissing prog rock or jazz fusion in the name of the Velvet Underground and Blue Cheer, I can throw about 1000 links your way (though I'd rather not, as it would be an infuriating task).

In the UK, music journalists, by definition, are pretty much exclusively recruited from the ranks of the "I liked them before they got popular but now they're crap" wanker brigade. As such, Ive always viewed music journalists as primarily a breed of parasite, rather than something that contributes to music's culture in any way. There are exceptions, of course, but sometimes you'd think music journalists seem to exist to cruelly dismiss all music.

[herodotus]

Nothing like reversing yourself in your final statement.

Actually, that was humor.

Dry, perhaps, and not very funny, but certainly not serious.

[robogone]

As you're quoting me I assume you're asking those questions in response to that statement, so I'm a little confused as I neither called anyone an idiot or said that they're full of shit

I know. It seemed to me that you were implying it, though.

Nope, not at all.

I actually said I don't attach importance to whether they can play or not i.e. both cases are valid as far as being a musician is concerned. Prompted by hearing the oft quoted "at least they can play their instruments"

I'm sorry. To me, 'I just don't attach any value to the perceived ability to play an instrument or not' sounds like a dismissal of those who learn to play their instruments well. Just as 'I just don't attach any value to the perceived ability to do math problems or not' sounds like a dismissal of the importance of math education. If you were merely stating a 'live and let live' sort of position, then I misapprehended you.

I was and you did.

[robogone]

BUT...

If you're going to play LIVE, you should know how to play your instrument (however you need to use it to make the sounds you want).

In other words, to be a PERFORMER, you need to know your instrument.

I'd hate to go to a concert just to find out that the person that's making noise on stage has no idea what they're doing in order to make the sounds that I want to hear.

You see I have no problem with that at all. To me it's all about the performance and whether someone is a virtuoso or whether they had never set hands on that instrument before getting on stage it's all the same.

I think it's more accurate to say "In other words, to be a PERFORMER and stay within the confines of conventional music, you need to know your instrument."

I've seen guys walk onstage with toolboxes and the front end of a car covered in mics and just beat the hell out of it while one guy screws around with an old analog synth and another plays a guitar through 3 different distortion/fuzz boxes. I talked to the synth guy after and he said they knew each other but had never rehearsed ever and that the guitarist was the only one who ever learned 'how to play' an instrument. f**king awesome gig though, and it didn't in any way suffer from any of them not having learned to play their instruments.