hey guys I've been enjoying music as an entertainment outlet for a long time. My tastes in music have changed throughout my life as I find new music that relates to what I feel inside.
I don't really consume popular music however, I feel that mostly it saturates very quickly and does not offer nutrition. After listening to Frank Zappa's critiques on the music industry in some of his interviews, I'm wondering if the same things are happening in many of the various niche facets of the music industry today.
Basically from what I got out of his comments were this: there was only really a market for formula music, music was made more for advertising a lifestyle than just for the sake of making music, and recording companies and distributors pressured artists by holding them responsible to pay for much of the promotion and distribution.
My girlfriend did pr emailing for a really successful edm dj a while back so I got to talk to him about it. He said people spend thousands of dollars on promoting events and music through social media. He described it as "pay money to win." Also from what I understand of labels, you have to make similar music to whats already on the label, and they take the intellectual property rights when you sign on.
In these observations, I see a recipe for artistic stagnation. Are these edm moguls really trying to connect with people on a personal level, and enrich cultural dialogues, or are they just trying to sell me a product?
Is electronic music formula?
-
- KVRist
- 88 posts since 11 Feb, 2012
-
- KVRAF
- 7413 posts since 8 Feb, 2003 from London, UK
From what you've written, "formula music is formula" is what can be concluded. Everything else isn't. The majority will always be the biggest market -- that's what majority means. So if you want the biggest return, you sell to the biggest market. You find the formula. If you're not interested in that but in making music you enjoy making, none of it's relevant.
-
- KVRAF
- 15135 posts since 7 Sep, 2008
Top 40 music = formula. Regardless of genre.
"I was wondering if you'd like to try Magic Mushrooms"
"Oooh I dont know. Sounds a bit scary"
"It's not scary. You just lose a sense of who you are and all that sh!t"
"Oooh I dont know. Sounds a bit scary"
"It's not scary. You just lose a sense of who you are and all that sh!t"
-
- KVRAF
- 8130 posts since 13 Jan, 2003 from Darkest Kent, UK
Maybe stating the obvious but you can't just say 'electronic' music is formulaic. Go listen to, say, Jon Hopkins or someone featured on the Headphone Commute website, no chart busting formula at work there. 
-
- KVRAF
- 7001 posts since 20 Mar, 2012 from Babbleon
But isn't everything formula? Isn't the idea of "I am not going to be formulaic" also formulaic, a formula to not be formulaic?
Even the avant garde and alternative music genre are formulaic, no? Antipopmusic formula?
Okay some don't stick to a genre but isn't that also just another formula of "try everything". I mean wasn't even David Bowie who was using randomness to make his lyrics and music less formulaic, formulaic? He was using his formula and hopefully not the formula of the business people but it's still formula? Is there a difference between formula and method?
Even the avant garde and alternative music genre are formulaic, no? Antipopmusic formula?
Okay some don't stick to a genre but isn't that also just another formula of "try everything". I mean wasn't even David Bowie who was using randomness to make his lyrics and music less formulaic, formulaic? He was using his formula and hopefully not the formula of the business people but it's still formula? Is there a difference between formula and method?
ah böwakawa poussé poussé
-
- KVRAF
- 4589 posts since 7 Jun, 2012 from Warsaw
Just today I discovered that many of my favourite trance motiffs are not 4/4, which gives them this extra drive. Apparently it's good idea to escape from "4/4 formula".
Blog ------------- YouTube channel
Tricky-Loops wrote: (...)someone like Armin van Buuren who claims to make a track in half an hour and all his songs sound somewhat boring(...)
Tricky-Loops wrote: (...)someone like Armin van Buuren who claims to make a track in half an hour and all his songs sound somewhat boring(...)
-
- KVRAF
- 7413 posts since 8 Feb, 2003 from London, UK
Can you explain the musical form to someone else and have them reproduce it, and then play that to an independent party and have them compare to the original and say "Yes, those two are the same kind of musical form"? If so, you've found a formula. Otherwise not. If a single artist sounds like themselves, I wouldn't call it formulaic -- I think it has to extend beyond that.harryupbabble wrote:But isn't everything formula?
-
- KVRAF
- 7001 posts since 20 Mar, 2012 from Babbleon
pljones wrote:Can you explain the musical form to someone else and have them reproduce it, and then play that to an independent party and have them compare to the original and say "Yes, those two are the same kind of musical form"? If so, you've found a formula. Otherwise not. If a single artist sounds like themselves, I wouldn't call it formulaic -- I think it has to extend beyond that.harryupbabble wrote:But isn't everything formula?
I probably don't have the ears to say "this is exactly what this artist is doing in these person's music creations" thus reavealing that artist's fornula but "experts" have analyzed, for example, the works of The Beatles and they reveal the Beatles formula. My guess is that pretty much all music creators have a formula (or maybe even formulas, plural) that they use (intentionally or subconsciously) and it ends up being called their "style". Even nature is formulaic so how can humans not be?
But I guess knowing the Beatles formula does not mean one can make Beatlesque songs easily. A lot of people have, though, no? And some does not sound like the Beatles at all. Shall I list them? Nirvana, Pixies,... 90 percent of anyone interested in songwriting probably has been influenced by The Beatles, directly or indirectly. I mean one may hate The Beatles but then they find out that their favourite musician was influenced by The Beatles. Maybe not the whole band, but what about the bass player, etc. Sure, I probably can't tell if the bass player was using Paul McCartney's bass formulas or patterns but it doesn't mean there wasn't a formula there just because I can't tell. Oh darn, I went on a tangent again. Hahaha. Oooops.
ah böwakawa poussé poussé
-
- KVRian
- 1116 posts since 6 Jul, 2009
Yes. And no.
When it comes down to it, an artist can't escape the principles of musical architecture. There are only so many ways that a piece of music can be structured. An artist can make variations, but it is just that -- a variation.
In that sense, all music (or literature, or carpentry, painting, sculpture...) is formulaic.
Where the real creativity comes in is marrying novel surface detail with structural principles that make the most flattering rendition at both levels of structure.
But I get that the sense you mean "formulaic" is that the music is generic and derivative. That the music is "phoned in" during creation.
I think there's some truth to that. If Artist X makes a great track, 1000+ other artists then try to copy what Artist X did then make 1000000+ tracks doing more or less the exact same thing. Yeah, that's forumlaic.
But if that's what sells, it's what many people are going to do. The reality is, if you want to make money in music, you DO have to make the kind of music that sells.
That doesn't mean that you can't be authentic and genuinely creative at the same time, though. Artist X did it -- I think the copy cats may ultimately be the problem you seem to be upset with.
I think the right attitude is "How can I make a track that a lot of people will want, but that I still feel represents my authentic artisitic sensibilities." I think that's the ticket. The problem is when people only focus on one half of the equation.
When it comes down to it, an artist can't escape the principles of musical architecture. There are only so many ways that a piece of music can be structured. An artist can make variations, but it is just that -- a variation.
In that sense, all music (or literature, or carpentry, painting, sculpture...) is formulaic.
Where the real creativity comes in is marrying novel surface detail with structural principles that make the most flattering rendition at both levels of structure.
But I get that the sense you mean "formulaic" is that the music is generic and derivative. That the music is "phoned in" during creation.
I think there's some truth to that. If Artist X makes a great track, 1000+ other artists then try to copy what Artist X did then make 1000000+ tracks doing more or less the exact same thing. Yeah, that's forumlaic.
But if that's what sells, it's what many people are going to do. The reality is, if you want to make money in music, you DO have to make the kind of music that sells.
That doesn't mean that you can't be authentic and genuinely creative at the same time, though. Artist X did it -- I think the copy cats may ultimately be the problem you seem to be upset with.
I think the right attitude is "How can I make a track that a lot of people will want, but that I still feel represents my authentic artisitic sensibilities." I think that's the ticket. The problem is when people only focus on one half of the equation.
-
- KVRAF
- 4727 posts since 25 Mar, 2006 from The city by the bay
Depending on your definition, you could say that Bach's fugues all follow a formula. In fact, Mozart's greatness could be said to have been what he did within a relatively simple composing (form)ula. The musical analysis involved in figuring it out is rather simple but what he did with it is where the interesting stuff resides.
That said, there tend to very often be 'social' factors which can lead to rather similar works. And for whatever reasons, when a style of music seems to find popular and commercial success, there are many who tend to do what the people want, yet some still seem to find ways to be different or 'unique'. You think Strauss was the only composer of waltzes in the late 19th century in Vienna? Of course not, there were many doing the 3/4 thing. He just seemed to have a special talent for finding ways to make interesting music out of that formula.
That said, there tend to very often be 'social' factors which can lead to rather similar works. And for whatever reasons, when a style of music seems to find popular and commercial success, there are many who tend to do what the people want, yet some still seem to find ways to be different or 'unique'. You think Strauss was the only composer of waltzes in the late 19th century in Vienna? Of course not, there were many doing the 3/4 thing. He just seemed to have a special talent for finding ways to make interesting music out of that formula.
-
- KVRAF
- 8082 posts since 9 Jan, 2003 from Saint Louis MO
"x = 3" is a very different formula from "x <> 3"harryupbabble wrote:But isn't everything formula? Isn't the idea of "I am not going to be formulaic" also formulaic, a formula to not be formulaic?
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 88 posts since 11 Feb, 2012
Artists can do whatever they want with their music, that's the point of the music that I make. When I'm talking about formula music I'm talking about the commercial aspect of it, its synonymous with advertising.rp314 wrote:Depending on your definition, you could say that Bach's fugues all follow a formula. In fact, Mozart's greatness could be said to have been what he did within a relatively simple composing (form)ula.
Mozart wasn't very popular during his time, idk about Bach and Strauss, but now they are considered geniuses. Many sounds that are received at first as vulgar have gone to shape a lot of music thereafter. If I make music that's too different I won't have money for projects or platforms for my music. I think these circumstances are brought about by the authoritarian state consumers share with the success of pop music due to pr brainwashing.
I'm not putting blame on the industry, I'm just saying I think this ignorance will cause suffering in the long run.
-
- KVRAF
- 10161 posts since 16 Dec, 2002
Well you're not going to write a book in Chinese if you don't understand the language
-
- KVRAF
- 5223 posts since 20 Jul, 2010
All music in the West is stagnating by and large. That goes for pop music and underground/electronic music. Look at drum and bass, when it started it was like a punk movement. It was about shocking rhythms and bass that could knock you off your feet. Then they all grew up, had kids, and got Sensible. Look at pop music, it's always been formulaic to a degree (i.e. maximize profit, not be too challenging). But these days there seems to be much less of a variety of styles, genres and feels being put out. Who cares as long as the video has lesbian bondage and baphomet poses, right?
The democratiziation of electronic music hasn't helped, either. Because now everyday, sensible people can make music, and they make it sensibly. Hell, the first thing they do is fret over their branding, logo, etc, just like a corporation. "Good product!" is a genuine compliment, meant without irony. Never mind establishing a stance with regards to arrangement, sound design and mixing, or even musicianship. That path has been well trodden for you, Go to EDM school and follow the signposts to the nearest prerequisite stabs, plucks, basslines and saccharine melodies. Change one thing and call it yours. Get a snazzy logo and do some marketing/spam.
All that's left is trying to get one extra percieved decibel of loudness over the competition. Highpass everything except the bass so everything sounds plasticy, unreal and grating (sound is built from the fundamental up, not a good idea to remove the foundation just to gain some dB when we all have volume knobs!).
It's just stupid. Autotune, auto harmony, auto chord choosers, auto quantize, auto arrangement, presets, super easy to use software, pre-built loop libraries. Only a matter of time until they just press a button and get a full EDM track. Why bother with all that hard work, learning and experimentation crap. Most don't want a relationship with sound, but just to look good and gain status.
That said, that's just the majority. Thankfully a lot of people are getting sick of it and there's a thriving counterculture, you just have to look for it and support it, because just look at how Youtube is slowly changing into a corporate, lazy cash grab. Reaction videos - just take someone else's idea, replay it, and say a few things over it and pull a few faces and it's yours to monetize. You can now make more money by being young and conventionally attractive on musical.ly by doing f**k all than you can stand any chance of making money off of talent. Those that explore do it because they love exploring, anything else is a bonus.
#worldisfukt
The democratiziation of electronic music hasn't helped, either. Because now everyday, sensible people can make music, and they make it sensibly. Hell, the first thing they do is fret over their branding, logo, etc, just like a corporation. "Good product!" is a genuine compliment, meant without irony. Never mind establishing a stance with regards to arrangement, sound design and mixing, or even musicianship. That path has been well trodden for you, Go to EDM school and follow the signposts to the nearest prerequisite stabs, plucks, basslines and saccharine melodies. Change one thing and call it yours. Get a snazzy logo and do some marketing/spam.
All that's left is trying to get one extra percieved decibel of loudness over the competition. Highpass everything except the bass so everything sounds plasticy, unreal and grating (sound is built from the fundamental up, not a good idea to remove the foundation just to gain some dB when we all have volume knobs!).
It's just stupid. Autotune, auto harmony, auto chord choosers, auto quantize, auto arrangement, presets, super easy to use software, pre-built loop libraries. Only a matter of time until they just press a button and get a full EDM track. Why bother with all that hard work, learning and experimentation crap. Most don't want a relationship with sound, but just to look good and gain status.
That said, that's just the majority. Thankfully a lot of people are getting sick of it and there's a thriving counterculture, you just have to look for it and support it, because just look at how Youtube is slowly changing into a corporate, lazy cash grab. Reaction videos - just take someone else's idea, replay it, and say a few things over it and pull a few faces and it's yours to monetize. You can now make more money by being young and conventionally attractive on musical.ly by doing f**k all than you can stand any chance of making money off of talent. Those that explore do it because they love exploring, anything else is a bonus.
#worldisfukt
http://sendy.bandcamp.com/releases < My new album at Bandcamp! Now pay what you like!
-
- KVRAF
- 25849 posts since 20 Jan, 2008 from a star near where you are
...but then again if you go farthest West, you'll end up in the EastSendy wrote:All music in the West is stagnating by and large.
