Oh Melody where have you gone...?

[tranel]

Sorry, just had to get this off my chest. I have two problems with most modern electronic music:

1) It seems to me that we are more interested in what our instruments can do, in terms of features, rather than composing.

Ah, lets upload a didgeridoo sample, use LFO1 (sine 4/4)to modulate panning, LFO2 to modulate a low-pass cutoff (square 1/8), a 63 step envelope to modulate something else, timestretch it into twice its original length, then vocode the whole thing with a 180BPM drumloop, and then smack on umpteen effects (horrible software-emulated "tube distortion" being the last in the chain).

The result is most likely something quite unique, something that the creator may think "breaks new boundaries in music". Yes, but the question is: Is it musical? Would we want to listen to it? As for uniqueness, I draw a sigh of relief whenever I hear something that has not been mangled into oblivion, because it is clean, clear, makes musical sense. Inventiveness is a great thing, and you can do a lot of cool stuff with today's software, but at the end of the day it's about music (unless of course you are a sound designer, not a musician). Music first, features second.

2) Loops. Are you really creating your own music, if you're using drumloops, bassloops, guitarloops, brassloops where someone else did all the work?? How hard it is to drop loops into a sequencer?

You can play realistic guitar, brass, string or bassparts yourself if you use a good sampler with velocity-switched multisamples. Some of the acoustic drum libraries available today are outstanding sound-wise, for example. The only possible exception here is percussion, because if they are to sound authentic they often require a certain "cultural" feel/knowledge - I wouldn't know how to program realistic-sounding middle eastern darbukas for instance. Or African djembe.

What's the point of buying sample CDs full of synthbass loops or electronic drum loops?? Create them yourself, the satisfaction is so much greater.

The second thing about loops is that the creator tends to forget about the melody. It is easy to stack loops upon loops and create a cool "groove" where different tracks are turned on and off to create "variation", but then what? What happened to chords arrangements, memorable, evolving melodies (not textures)? There is so little of this in modern electronic music, it just disappeared! But, do note, the two don't exclude each other - kraftwerk came up with some nice melodies (radioaktivität), as did depeche mode and many many others. Why, because they composed their music from scratch.

[androidlove]

I've only hinted at these points on KVR. That IS the way I feel, but I don't want to tell others they're wrong for composing the way they do. I've been through many stages myself.

[tranel]

Basically, I wrote this to bring about a deeper discussion about this, not to tell people how they should compose. It's a free world (at least some parts of it), but these are my opinions nevertheless.

[Meloday]

amen brother!

[The Chase]

amen brother!

If thats a joke, I find it rather humorous!

[The Chase]

Sorry, just had to get this off my chest. I have two problems with most modern electronic music:

1) It seems to me that we are more interested in what our instruments can do, in terms of features, rather than composing.

Ah, lets upload a didgeridoo sample, use LFO1 (sine 4/4)to modulate panning, LFO2 to modulate a low-pass cutoff (square 1/8), a 63 step envelope to modulate something else, timestretch it into twice its original length, then vocode the whole thing with a 180BPM drumloop, and then smack on umpteen effects (horrible software-emulated "tube distortion" being the last in the chain).

The result is most likely something quite unique, something that the creator may think "breaks new boundaries in music". Yes, but the question is: Is it musical? Would we want to listen to it? As for uniqueness, I draw a sigh of relief whenever I hear something that has not been mangled into oblivion, because it is clean, clear, makes musical sense. Inventiveness is a great thing, and you can do a lot of cool stuff with today's software, but at the end of the day it's about music (unless of course you are a sound designer, not a musician). Music first, features second.

2) Loops. Are you really creating your own music, if you're using drumloops, bassloops, guitarloops, brassloops where someone else did all the work?? How hard it is to drop loops into a sequencer?

You can play realistic guitar, brass, string or bassparts yourself if you use a good sampler with velocity-switched multisamples. Some of the acoustic drum libraries available today are outstanding sound-wise, for example. The only possible exception here is percussion, because if they are to sound authentic they often require a certain "cultural" feel/knowledge - I wouldn't know how to program realistic-sounding middle eastern darbukas for instance. Or African djembe.

What's the point of buying sample CDs full of synthbass loops or electronic drum loops?? Create them yourself, the satisfaction is so much greater.

The second thing about loops is that the creator tends to forget about the melody. It is easy to stack loops upon loops and create a cool "groove" where different tracks are turned on and off to create "variation", but then what? What happened to chords arrangements, memorable, evolving melodies (not textures)? There is so little of this in modern electronic music, it just disappeared! But, do note, the two don't exclude each other - kraftwerk came up with some nice melodies (radioaktivität), as did depeche mode and many many others. Why, because they composed their music from scratch.

I really don't mean to insult you, but you are sort of barking in the wind here. Everything you said here is:
A) pondered about by every average artist
B) heavily discussed at KVR at all times, particularly right now

Take a listen to this track: "Ram Trilogy - Titan". The beat is almost %100 loops, and the fx have been used in 1000 other jungle songs, yet it remains original by (you guessed it) sound design and arrangement. This is where the originality comes in. It is still musical art, but the originality is being derived in an unorthodox way.

I know that's only one track, but its the best example.

[FaX]

Sorry, just had to get this off my chest. I have two problems with most modern electronic music:

1) It seems to me that we are more interested in what our instruments can do, in terms of features, rather than composing.

Ah, lets upload a didgeridoo sample, use LFO1 (sine 4/4)to modulate panning, LFO2 to modulate a low-pass cutoff (square 1/8), a 63 step envelope to modulate something else, timestretch it into twice its original length, then vocode the whole thing with a 180BPM drumloop, and then smack on umpteen effects (horrible software-emulated "tube distortion" being the last in the chain).

The result is most likely something quite unique, something that the creator may think "breaks new boundaries in music". Yes, but the question is: Is it musical? Would we want to listen to it? As for uniqueness, I draw a sigh of relief whenever I hear something that has not been mangled into oblivion, because it is clean, clear, makes musical sense. Inventiveness is a great thing, and you can do a lot of cool stuff with today's software, but at the end of the day it's about music (unless of course you are a sound designer, not a musician). Music first, features second.

2) Loops. Are you really creating your own music, if you're using drumloops, bassloops, guitarloops, brassloops where someone else did all the work?? How hard it is to drop loops into a sequencer?

You can play realistic guitar, brass, string or bassparts yourself if you use a good sampler with velocity-switched multisamples. Some of the acoustic drum libraries available today are outstanding sound-wise, for example. The only possible exception here is percussion, because if they are to sound authentic they often require a certain "cultural" feel/knowledge - I wouldn't know how to program realistic-sounding middle eastern darbukas for instance. Or African djembe.

What's the point of buying sample CDs full of synthbass loops or electronic drum loops?? Create them yourself, the satisfaction is so much greater.

The second thing about loops is that the creator tends to forget about the melody. It is easy to stack loops upon loops and create a cool "groove" where different tracks are turned on and off to create "variation", but then what? What happened to chords arrangements, memorable, evolving melodies (not textures)? There is so little of this in modern electronic music, it just disappeared! But, do note, the two don't exclude each other - kraftwerk came up with some nice melodies (radioaktivität), as did depeche mode and many many others. Why, because they composed their music from scratch.

Don't worry Chase I was well informed recently on how only fags (oh soory pooftas) used melody and counterpoint .....
Of course I was the one being the music snob .
I was of the opinion the there was way to much "beat fascism" in electronic music.
I'm of the inherent view point that as an artform, electronic music is like any other expressive form of art; so the full spectra of what constititues it should be explored .
IE: meter / tempo / melody / counterpoint / key change / atonality / dissonance / abstraction / musique concrete / experimentation etc etc ...
Not all music needs a rythm section / conversely we don't always need complex chord structures / dramatic key changes or melodic counterpoint either for tension and release within a track.
Nor do we need bog standard 4/4 or the living hell that is pythagoran / pentatonic key scaling.
Nor does everything have to live within the realm of set time,meter and space ( from within a perceptual frame work ) . I'm also pretty anti this everything has to be under 5 mins bullshite : Either take Ritalin or learn to focus on a conceptual idea for longer than 3 mins 20 seconds .
That said they're all valid tools for writing with and should really be explored by everyone .
It was the same studying design and fine art ( well in the 80's at Uni anyway ) you pretty much covered painting / printmaking / design / sculpture / photography / mixed media / colour theory / classical art history through to modern day etc etc.
Well for what it's worth that's my counterpoint poofta artfag leftist I don't wear sunglasses and use distortion limp wristed view of it all .

[Churchy]

Sorry, just had to get this off my chest. I have two problems with most modern electronic music:

1) It seems to me that we are more interested in what our instruments can do, in terms of features, rather than composing.

Ah, lets upload a didgeridoo sample, use LFO1 (sine 4/4)to modulate panning, LFO2 to modulate a low-pass cutoff (square 1/8), a 63 step envelope to modulate something else, timestretch it into twice its original length, then vocode the whole thing with a 180BPM drumloop, and then smack on umpteen effects (horrible software-emulated "tube distortion" being the last in the chain).

The result is most likely something quite unique, something that the creator may think "breaks new boundaries in music". Yes, but the question is: Is it musical? Would we want to listen to it? As for uniqueness, I draw a sigh of relief whenever I hear something that has not been mangled into oblivion, because it is clean, clear, makes musical sense. Inventiveness is a great thing, and you can do a lot of cool stuff with today's software, but at the end of the day it's about music (unless of course you are a sound designer, not a musician). Music first, features second.

2) Loops. Are you really creating your own music, if you're using drumloops, bassloops, guitarloops, brassloops where someone else did all the work?? How hard it is to drop loops into a sequencer?

You can play realistic guitar, brass, string or bassparts yourself if you use a good sampler with velocity-switched multisamples. Some of the acoustic drum libraries available today are outstanding sound-wise, for example. The only possible exception here is percussion, because if they are to sound authentic they often require a certain "cultural" feel/knowledge - I wouldn't know how to program realistic-sounding middle eastern darbukas for instance. Or African djembe.

What's the point of buying sample CDs full of synthbass loops or electronic drum loops?? Create them yourself, the satisfaction is so much greater.

The second thing about loops is that the creator tends to forget about the melody. It is easy to stack loops upon loops and create a cool "groove" where different tracks are turned on and off to create "variation", but then what? What happened to chords arrangements, memorable, evolving melodies (not textures)? There is so little of this in modern electronic music, it just disappeared! But, do note, the two don't exclude each other - kraftwerk came up with some nice melodies (radioaktivität), as did depeche mode and many many others. Why, because they composed their music from scratch.

well it should go without saying , that anyone that uses a digeredoo sample is a fucktard!

loops shit me too. they are just lazy.

as for melody, well there i may have to disagree. melodic component is cool if it suits the song, but as someone producing techno and industrial hardcore sometimes i want to create something that is cold and emotionless; so there is no melody part.

all depends on the feeling

but as for creating a track from scratch, i totally agree, that's what i try to do; and that is (to me) the point of electronic music.

[geoslake]

now start composing and dont bother us

[M'Snah]

The result is most likely something quite unique, something that the creator may think "breaks new boundaries in music". Yes, but the question is: Is it musical? Would we want to listen to it? As for uniqueness, I draw a sigh of relief whenever I hear something that has not been mangled into oblivion, because it is clean, clear, makes musical sense. Inventiveness is a great thing, and you can do a lot of cool stuff with today's software, but at the end of the day it's about music (unless of course you are a sound designer, not a musician). Music first, features second.

Does that mean you advise me to to buy Doppelmangler in the groupbuy right now?

--HansM

[Panda]

I totally agree on the loop side of the argument, but the melody? I dunno, but electronic sounds tend te be quite complex (anyway, that's the way i like them to be- in contrast to acoustic tones and hits), and i think it's not a good idea to try and make complex melodies with already complex sounds. That's why, if i use melody, it's almost always instrumental- piano, trumpet, whatever.
And i must say i don't agree on what you said on creating acoustic melody from scratch- there's no way you can do that in a sequencer, you have to record a real musician if you want it to sound that way.
But anyway, this topic's done to death already so i'll just shut up...

[whyterabbyt]

tranel quoth Sorry, just had to get this off my chest. I have two problems with most modern electronic music:

1) It seems to me that we are more interested in what our instruments can do, in terms of features, rather than composing.

Who is this "we" and why do you think you can speak for them?

The result is most likely something quite unique, something that the creator may think "breaks new boundaries in music".

Or, far more likely, "sounds good and right in the context of what Im trying to create".

Yes, but the question is: Is it musical?

No, it isnt. The question is "does it add what I want, whether or not some other schmuck thinks that is 'musical' or not"

Would we want to listen to it?

"We" who? You think there's only one single audience? Think again.

As for uniqueness, I draw a sigh of relief whenever I hear something that has not been mangled into oblivion, because it is clean, clear, makes musical sense.

That's fine. However your own tastes are not reflective of everyone else's. There are plenty of people for whom your definition of 'musical sense' has precisely zero value.

Inventiveness is a great thing, and you can do a lot of cool stuff with today's software, but at the end of the day it's about music (unless of course you are a sound designer, not a musician).

The fact that you choose to limit your definition of 'music' renders your argument circular.

Music first, features second.

Nope. Composition first, 'traditional' standards of music last.

2) Loops. Are you really creating your own music, if you're using drumloops, bassloops, guitarloops, brassloops where someone else did all the work?? How hard it is to drop loops into a sequencer?

This is being done to death elsewhere. Meanwhile, if you hire a drummer, bass guitarist, guitarist and brass section where someone else does all the work, how hard is that?

Youcan play realistic guitar, brass, string or bassparts yourself if you use a good sampler with velocity-switched multisamples.

Why is realism a requirement? Because it fits your narrow definitions of how music should be?

Some of the acoustic drum libraries available today are outstanding sound-wise, for example. The only possible exception here is percussion, because if they are to sound authentic they often require a certain "cultural" feel/knowledge - I wouldn't know how to program realistic-sounding middle eastern darbukas for instance. Or African djembe.

Why would you be bound by impersonating another culture's musical style? Lack of 'inventiveness'?

What's the point of buying sample CDs full of synthbass loops or electronic drum loops?? Create them yourself, the satisfaction is so much greater.

I guess you dont work professionally to tight deadlines then.
But I thought your earliest point was commenting negatively about taking samples and mangling them to hell with effects and all the features of the software. Now you say people should create their own sounds. Isnt that complete contradiction? How do you create those loops and sounds if you dont learn to use all the features of the software?

The second thing about loops is that the creator tends to forget about the melody.

Assumption. Just because you consider melody important does not mean that otehr people find it so.

It is easy to stack loops upon loops and create a cool "groove" where different tracks are turned on and off to create "variation", but then what?

Then exactly the same as with any other composition...

What happened to chords arrangements, memorable, evolving melodies (not textures)?

Not everyone considers these things of any significance or importance.

There is so little of this in modern electronic music, it just disappeared!

Maybe you're listening to the wrong stuff.

But, do note, the two don't exclude each other - kraftwerk came up with some nice melodies (radioaktivität), as did depeche mode and many many others. Why, because they composed their music from scratch.

No; because they wanted to produce a particular kind of music which relies on melodies; pop.
It is an absolute nonsense to claim that this was because they worked from scratch. Plenty of music which eschews melody, chordal arranagements and all your other 'traditional' trappings was created from scratch.

The method is irrelevant. The listener's response to the results is what is important, and no two listener's will ever have identical tastes. Your attempt to pigeonhole how things should be done, and how they should turn out are nothing more than crass and uninformed generalisations.

[CypherOne]

melody schmelody

[RChler]

i think this is a serious problem of elctronic music,

perhaps you'll find this interesting

http://www.magicandaccident.com/matthew_PCCOM.htm

it's a Manifest of production of electronic music written by electro-jazz innovator-GOD Matthew Herbert...

in my onpinion, loops are great if music producing is about fast money for advertisements and evening entertainment of people who just don't have the time to build theier own drum sequences, and i think this is where loops are used most.

i think the most interesting point is : where is the border line ? is an artist to be blamed for untrueness if he even uses presets, as Herbert claims ?

i think all kind of noise is worth to be programmed, but i think more people would still listen to a good melody, even if it is played of a children's piano in a heavyly distorted cathedral reverb

[ScarKord]

whyterabbyt - A fantastic and well balanced response. Nothing more to add, you said it all