The end of true creativity?

[Thunderbird91]

Do you guys think its possible that eventually everything you play will sound like something you've heard before? Don't you think its much harder to be creative now than it was 50 years ago?

[peaveyuser]

hmmmmm, you've got a point there but you still can be creative, just go a bit over the top ( not to much though, then it will probably sound bad), use techniques that aren't used much or personalize techniques to make it sound different.

[Asa Samuel]

its harder, but there are some people who cant be creative.

[Adam Barkley]

Originally Posted by Thunderbird91

Do you guys think its possible that eventually everything you play will sound like something you've heard before? Don't you think its much harder to be creative now than it was 50 years ago?

Yes and no. I think it is easier write music similar to something you've never heard before.

[Jim Nazium]

I don't know ... on the one hand, there are only 12 notes, and only so many ways to put them together, so every possible musical phrase must have been played by now.

On the other hand, I'm in my 40s, and I remember when sampling synthesizers and drum machines were just coming out and many people thought they would be the death of creativity in music. What actually happened? People just found new ways to be creative, and the new tools made many new things possible (and also helped people rediscover a lot of cool old stuff, via sampling).

I expect that people, especially young people, will always find new, creative ways to express themselves.

[afinalfantasy]

I find that music that isn't on the radio or too well known usually has more creativity currently. But thats just my opinion.

[lefty007]

I've been feeling that way for years. I feel that everything has been done already, regarding music composition and styles.

I find it so hard to find anything creatively innovating these days. There are just so many notes, so many chords, so many instruments, so many sounds, and so many rhythms you can combine.

But there is still room for better melodies and compositions. Not so much for techniques. I think Paganini had already reached the most virtuosity, technical finesse and speed I care to listen by the 1800s

The only refreshing things I've hear in the last 10 years are Radiohead, John Mayer, and Medeski, Martin & Wood, all of which are based in well-established and existing elements.

I dunno. I'm really digging Motown these days. Donny Hathaway. . . those were the days. . . And the early-'70s were so free musically. I think 90% of music creativity had peaked by the late '70s.

[Baryonyx]

They probably had threads like this in the days before jazz.

[AdlerAugen]

But they didn't have forums and internet before jazz, so they couldn't have had threads like this. Threads like this didn't exist back then, because jazz lives forever!

[Matt Till]

There is a lot of uncharted ground, I think. I say abandon 12 tone scales, bah I say, bah.

I don't know. It is rough, especially since the first thing people say when they describe your band, it's like, "A cross between ______ and _______ with a post rock type of vibe"

It's not impossible, but I say, embrace new musical technology, be open to new things in general. And always look for new influence, listen to everything... that isn't some general statement either. When you ask a lot of people what they listen to, they reply, "I listen to everything." And what that means, "I listen to Nickelback, Ken Chesney, Black Eyed Peas, Dashboard Confessional," everything that's presented to them on the radio. Hunt down new music... or old music as it often is. Bastardize a little bit of everything you listen to, bam, new genre: Or maybe you'll just sound like another Mr. Bungle knockoff.

Screw original, just play what's popular.