Does minimalism spur creativity?

Anything about MUSIC but doesn't fit into the forums above.
RELATED
PRODUCTS

Post

I used to make everything like this. I'd restrict myself to a single sound source, or a single self-made effect, or a single something. I placed additional restrictions on how I worked. Everything in the DAW had to be audio. If I needed fresh audio, I'd open Audiomulch and record live to disk. I had a completely MIDI free workflow for a very long time. All that stuff is in the 'experimental + concept tracks' link in my sig. Seven Years (100% guitar) was probably the most successful of that lot. Wonky opening aside.

https://soundcloud.com/charityqueen/sev ... nd-effects

I'm far more relaxed with the workflow these days, but I still feel like I'm doing something wrong if I need more than around 6 or 7 tracks. Obviously if I started writing for orchestra or somesuch I'd bust that limit fairly quickly, but even the dense textural electronic stuff I do tends to only need around 4 or 5 tracks. I prefer a very raw and direct sound, and keeping the track count minimal helps me achieve that.

I still impose restrictions now and again to see what happens though. For Boiler Room I slapped a track of noise and some hefty distortion with random settings on the master and tried to work around it. No after the fact tweaking - my master track was busted and I had to deal with it. Resulted in one of my best tracks (by my generally poor standards.)

https://soundcloud.com/charityqueen/boiler-room

Post

I’ve always found it rather amusing, the myth that having too many options and too much choice hampers creativity. Unless you really only have a few tools available, many of us will have many instruments at our disposal. That doesn’t mean you’re going to use very single piece of gear on every single track. You’ll pick something to start with, and start making some noise with it. Maybe you’ll use a small handful of tools. That’s mostly how the creative process works, but we don’t label it minimalism. On the other hand, it could be just as fun of a creative exercise to try to use as many bits of gear as possible.

Another thought: better go tell the symphony that you’d be more creative with a string quartet.
Incomplete list of my gear: 1/8" audio input jack.

Post

Terrafractyl wrote:I think that when it comes to creativity, making a hard and fast rule and then sticking to it forever is just about the worst thing you can do. Mix it up a bit I say!
Some days I will find limiting myself to be incredibly useful, or even more fun. but on the the other hand, I get a ton of idea's from playing around with and exploring new tools/Toys.
Actually I would say at least 75% of the things I actually finish, start that way, so I guess I'm usually a more is more kinda guy. but I try to mix it up a bit.
Words I can get behind. I do find that,after time,there are favorites & methods that get more usage
along with the 'fresh blood'
Don't feed the gators,y'all
https://m.soundcloud.com/tonedeadj

Post

deastman wrote:I’ve always found it rather amusing, the myth that having too many options and too much choice hampers creativity. Unless you really only have a few tools available, many of us will have many instruments at our disposal. That doesn’t mean you’re going to use very single piece of gear on every single track. You’ll pick something to start with, and start making some noise with it. Maybe you’ll use a small handful of tools. That’s mostly how the creative process works, but we don’t label it minimalism. On the other hand, it could be just as fun of a creative exercise to try to use as many bits of gear as possible.

Another thought: better go tell the symphony that you’d be more creative with a string quartet.
Great points, and I think for most people everything there is spot on, but there are people like me who find having too many options absolutely paralysing.

The move from FastTracker 2 to Cubase VST 5 circa the year 2000 mentally ruined me and I didn't make music for years. I'm sure having the entire world of sound suddenly open up would be hugely liberating for most people, but I just felt daunted. Making music felt so much easier when there was a limit on the sound palette and fidelity achievable. I felt like I could really push against those limits and make FastTracker 2 sing, and moving to a situation where there was no limit to the quality I could achieve yet my music always sounded worse than it did before... Well, I didn't take it too well.

I was still a teenager at the time, and I'd already been using FT2 for about 5 years at that point, so I'd learned the old way just as the new way was coming in. I still can't read a left-to-right piano roll intuitively like I can a tracker column.

I guess it just took me a while to realise that, as you say, I needed to bring along and enforce the limits myself rather than expect to find them in the software. The process I describe in my post above, that super restrictive audio-only workflow, came from that. I'm happy where I am now after slowly opening up from there, but yeah, it took me a decade to fully come to terms with unlimited choice. :lol:

Post

Think it's more of a fun challenge that breaks monotony of usual workflow for some, for others it can be good exercice of skills, but overall, whatever get's the job done, just don't spend your time demoing plugins instead of making music with them.
This entire forum is wading through predictions, opinions, barely formed thoughts, drama, and whining. If you don't enjoy that, why are you here? :D ShawnG

Post

Zexila wrote:whatever get's the job done, just don't spend your time demoing plugins instead of making music with them.
Wrong forum, mate.
You may think you can fly ... but you better not try

Post

It's strictly personal. I've you're leaning to a ADHD person, the more plugins the better. If you're more of a ADD person then minimal is the way to go for maximum creativity.
No band limits, aliasing is the noise of freedom!

Post

And what if I suffer from severe LA syndrome?

(LA stands for Lazy Ass)
You may think you can fly ... but you better not try

Post

DUBturbo :hihi:
No band limits, aliasing is the noise of freedom!

Post

I find the whole emphasis verges on creating dogma for oneself when the notion was initially to locate a strategy. But I'm wrong if it really totally works somehow...

Here's the thing and why I'd tend to be skeptical of that as any modus operandi: I use what I use because it suits the idea, not the other way around. The idea may come from the sound, and the more sound/the richer palette amounts to more = more. Shopping, I mean I'm in the store with the munchies, I'm terribly indecisive. In music I LIKE making decisions. I'm able to commit! So I would recommend reflection on that.

IE: there are ideas for solo harp. Or two pianos/four hands. There are ideas for a massive or symphonic-scale sound. One cannot have the same M.O. for all of it.

Post

recursive one wrote:
Zexila wrote:whatever get's the job done, just don't spend your time demoing plugins instead of making music with them.
Wrong forum, mate.
:hihi:
This entire forum is wading through predictions, opinions, barely formed thoughts, drama, and whining. If you don't enjoy that, why are you here? :D ShawnG

Post

My initial feeling is that if you're not creative, multiple "inputs" can help you be creative. If you possess a musically creative mind (I know that's up to perspective - ah, the world-driven perspective), then having one synth - or even one wave to work with, is quite sufficient. The one acoustic guitar sure hasn't stopped a zillion songs from being written - with a slew being quite creative.

Post

So all the composers writing symphonic works weren't creative like the person who finds 'one synth' "sufficient".

Post

That's actually a complicated issue. The type of composition created for particular sections of an orchestra is shaped quite significantly by practicality as well as genre and dogma.

A very basic synthesizer (for example a sine tone) can mimic any instrument and be controlled in far more complex ways which are simply physically impossible to perform with real instruments.

So you have to realize writing a symphony may actually be far more limited than writing for a single synthesizer, although it may appear at a glance to be the opposite.

The reality is it's more complicated than "at a glance".
Free plug-ins for Windows, MacOS and Linux. Xhip Synthesizer v8.0 and Xhip Effects Bundle v6.7.
The coder's credo: We believe our work is neither clever nor difficult; it is done because we thought it would be easy.
Work less; get more done.

Post

jancivil wrote:So all the composers writing symphonic works weren't creative like the person who finds 'one synth' "sufficient".
If you’re referring to what I gestured, I’m certainly not saying you can’t be creative and use multiple synths or instruments. Of course, you can be creative with a full palette of paints. However, I think even some of the greatest orchestral productions might sound pretty cool simply on a piano...but the original question is does being restricted to a”piano” spawn creativity? I’m sure it has.

Post Reply

Return to “Everything Else (Music related)”