KVR Audio

vespers75 · Post by **vespers75** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 6:27 pm

jancivil wrote: Hello, the simple enough argument there, which you can choose to ignore, why not, was:
the technology, *passive*, doesn't equal the quality of the *act*.

Hello, the title of this thread is "Mass Producing Mediocrity", not "the elements of mediocrity that only Jancivil sees fit to discuss", which you can choose to ignore...

jancivil wrote: I take a shitty guitar and do something you never heard the like of.

Yeah, right.

Taste considerations beside the point, entirely.

Cordelia · Post by **Cordelia** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 6:40 pm

I couldn't keep imagining music used to be less mediocre after I watched "Festival Express"
(Janis Joplin's performance excepted). 8 bands, 4 chords.

Ubiety · Post by **Ubiety** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 6:51 pm

jancivil wrote:You're going for a different definition of quality than I meant.

'A quality stratocaster', versus 'stratocaster means quality music per se'.

Technology isn't the actor here. Per example: I can get an interesting enough result on a shit guitar that won't even intone properly.

A different definition of quality? I'm talking about mediocrity; whether something is considered not very good relative to the expectation or desire for it to be better.

Also, I'm talking about the quality of production. The quality of production regardless of whether it is technology that is produced, something else, or whether technology facilitates production.

Your "quality stratocaster', versus 'stratocaster means quality music" example has been addressed.

eduardo_b · Post by **eduardo_b** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:24 pm

vespers75 wrote:
eduardo_b wrote:
As for measuring greatness, it's not really quantifiable
Agreed, which pretty much renders this:
eduardo_b wrote:but anyone who has taken art, music, literature or other classes, or studied these subjects, knows there is an extensive body of information, analysis and interpretation regarding them.
as having little relevance to anything aside from a generic history lesson riddled with the previous opinions of others.

No...you're overlooking the difference between quantifiable and extensive amounts of knowledge about the artistic category (art, music, etc.). Not quantifiable does not preclude the ranking of artists and art, but rather changes the criteria. The consensus of experts (art historians, curators) provides the criteria rather than numerical scoring.

eduardo_b · Post by **eduardo_b** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:30 pm

vurt wrote:
eduardo_b wrote:

Actually, I might venture that technology is the facilitator of increased mediocrity. Someone who has never touched a piano keyboard becomes an artist of the evolving synth pad. It's not much different than what happens when a karaoke machine and people who've had too much to drink are in the same place at the same time.
people having fun
oh my, we must stamp it out now!!!

Fun? There's nothing wrong with fun, but it won't have much relevance to mediocrity with or without enhanced technology. Not that fun doesn't matter, but one can have fun either way -- whether the results are very good or very not.

vurt · Post by **vurt** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:31 pm

experts

eduardo_b · Post by **eduardo_b** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:34 pm

vurt wrote:experts

Those bastards.

vespers75 · Post by **vespers75** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:42 pm

vurt wrote:experts

Exactly.

Why are they 'experts'? Because they know alot of history? Because they take a feather-duster to "Starry Night" once a week? Because they went to some school and were taught said history by others like themselves who need to pass on their precious opinions before they die off? (for a fee, I might add.)

And what was the class curiculum?

vespers75 wrote:a generic history lesson riddled with the previous opinions of others.

Just saying...

robogone · Post by **robogone** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:50 pm

Mediocrity isn't a by product of giving the masses access to technology, it's a product of giving record companies access to musicians.

Think this is new? Look at what the music industry in the US tried to do to rock and roll in the late 50s by churning out generic ballads with strings by singer that dressed the part.

Big Brother was never the one to worry about, MTV was...

eduardo_b · Post by **eduardo_b** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 9:02 pm

Ubiety wrote:I'm talking about the quality of production. The quality of production regardless of whether it is technology that is produced, something else, or whether technology facilitates production.

It's easy to tell that a fair number of people posting questions here have little experience or knowledge of production. Their involvement with it now is a direct result of being able to do production in the box, and thus have the technology at hand but not the knowledge or experience of what to do with it.

Some seem like they are reasonably skilled in music itself. I think a lot of what I deem mediocre music around the Internet, and in the Music Cafe here, isn't necessarily a problem with the musical ideas but often the production values. Funny how even average music sounds better when it sounds better.

dirty oscillators · Post by **dirty oscillators** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 9:05 pm

robojam wrote:Mediocrity isn't a by product of giving the masses access to technology, it's a product of giving record companies access to musicians.

and Disney:

Osmonds, Spears, Timberlake....

vespers75 · Post by **vespers75** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 9:12 pm

eduardo_b wrote: I think a lot of what I deem mediocre music around the Internet, and in the Music Cafe here, isn't necessarily a problem with the musical ideas but often the production values. Funny how even average music sounds better when it sounds better.

A few genres of music are actually based around a lo-fi aesthetic. Not to mention the 'lo-fi' effects in the KVR database...

Why? Some are possibly rebelling against the super-slick polished production sound of contemporary releases, and are tired of hearing that shit. Speaking of tired hearing and current music, that also relates to the "loudness wars", eh?

Ubiety · Post by **Ubiety** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 9:25 pm

eduardo_b wrote:I think a lot of what I deem mediocre music around the Internet, and in the Music Cafe here, isn't necessarily a problem with the musical ideas but often the production values. Funny how even average music sounds better when it sounds better.

And sometimes your girlfriend singing directly into your ear is the best music you've ever heard.

eduardo_b · Post by **eduardo_b** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 9:25 pm

vespers75 wrote:Speaking of tired hearing and current music, that also relates to the "loudness wars", eh?

You must be one of those optimists I keep hearing about.

eduardo_b · Post by **eduardo_b** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 9:26 pm

Ubiety wrote:
eduardo_b wrote:I think a lot of what I deem mediocre music around the Internet, and in the Music Cafe here, isn't necessarily a problem with the musical ideas but often the production values. Funny how even average music sounds better when it sounds better.
And sometimes your girlfriend singing directly into your ear is the best music you've ever heard.

No limiters, full dynamic range.

Mass Producing Mediocrity?