Opinions on technology

[s.m.80808]

I am not a technophobe, but it seems as if some sense of value has been lost in music. It seems as if music is made to be disposable now more than ever. I know that my personal habits have changed from buying a cd to downloading music (usually for free) and then deleting it shortly thereafter.

With so many people owning consumer grade recording gear (myself included), more music is out on the market. More music = better selection, but I don't think the quality of music coming out is particularly better. More music also = more bands that emulate each other.

My question for everyone is this:

Is technology and the ability to easily distribute music via the internet making music better, worse, or neither? What are some examples of it improving the actual music?

If nothing else, the current climate in music makes me appreciate classical music that much more because at least there is no debate whether it will stand the test of time because it already has.

[canopener]

As long as people buy, download, or view crappy music, people will continue to make crappy music.

/thread

[s.m.80808]

That's true.

But does technology improve the music experience and music as a whole or make it worse?

[Bayou_Brawler]

I think the more easily music is accessed the better for everyone.

i would think it would increase the quality of music because..... it's easier for you be exposed to music therefore easier to be exposed to "good" music..therefore increasing the probability of you learning about "good music" and thus increasing the chance that you will create and spread "good" music yourself

[tplyons]

IMO the rise of technology has been both good and bad for music. With inexpensive quality instruments, recording devices, and lastly electronic distribution, more and more people have gotten the chance to be a musician and it's much easier now than ever to get your 15 minutes of fame.

To be more than a one hit wonder in this day and age, is another story.

[s.m.80808]

Originally Posted by tplyons

IMO the rise of technology has been both good and bad for music. With inexpensive quality instruments, recording devices, and lastly electronic distribution, more and more people have gotten the chance to be a musician and it's much easier now than ever to get your 15 minutes of fame.

To be more than a one hit wonder in this day and age, is another story.

I agree with the one hit wonder part.

I think there are some really good products out there for little money, but I think there is the tradeoff and that mass produced gear has driven down overall quality. That is more economics than anything though.

With media in digital form it is easy to create and distribute, but the quality suffers both sonically (in highly compressed format at least) and content. Does digital distribution only reinforce the one-hit-wonder trend?

Do you think theres a point where we will get bored of each others 15 minutes of fame? I think that is happening already to an extent.

Originally Posted by Bayou_Brawler

I think the more easily music is accessed the better for everyone.

i would think it would increase the quality of music because..... it's easier for you be exposed to music therefore easier to be exposed to "good" music..therefore increasing the probability of you learning about "good music" and thus increasing the chance that you will create and spread "good" music yourself

I would agree that in theory it should be easier to find new music to like because it is so widespread.

On a personal level I haven't found it to be easier. Aside from international artists that I would never hear about any otherwise, there hasn't been any music for me to be excited over lately. That might just be my personal experience though.

Permit me to voice my complaint, but music lately has seemed really calculated, and not much fun. Music has been seeming like a one-sided conversation about nothing in particular not even the notion that it is purely for fun. (Ok, everything except for that Weird Al/Chamillionaire spoof that was kind of fun.)

For me it seems like "more" has just meant more of the same old thing over and over again with minor variations despite the fact that there is an abundance like never before to consume.

[BenF]

Sorry, nothing to bring to the table except these quotes.

"We've all heard that a million monkeys banging on a million typewriters will eventually reproduce the entire works of Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet, we know this is not true." Robert Wilensky

Sturgeon's Revelation: "Ninety percent of everything is crud."

[Bayou_Brawler]

Originally Posted by s.m.80808

For me it seems like "more" has just meant more of the same old thing over and over again with minor variations despite the fact that there is an abundance like never before to consume.

where do you live? what kind of music are you into?

i'm into mainly funk, jazz, blues, jamband, bluegrass cajun, gypsy, reggae...and just about everything else except for new rock, rap, and country.

myspace has helped me find some great original local live music to go see. i found this SUPER fat funky organ trio on there that i saw last week that killed live. as well as many other bands.

pandora.com has helped me find thousands of other bands i like.

i don't know how anyone could think that easier access to music would degrade the experience????

horrible music has been the mainstream (in my opinion anyway pop rock country boy girl bands bubble gum etc) and controlling the mainstream for the last 20 years..it's nothing new...it was in the works before all the technology...

the only think computer technology does is help you find the cool underground stuff...like i said I NEVER would have heard of this organ trio if it wasn't for myspace...they played just 15mins from me....

[shooter_mi]

I've been thinking abou this issue lately, and I'm inclined to say that while I think it's awesome that technology has empowered artists to distribute and promote their music, I think there are some negative effects, too. Mainly, that with most music accessible for free, people don't value it as much.

There's a perceived quality that goes with a low price, and it's silly to think that people's emotional investment in music won't be changed when the price is eliminated. I'm seeing a lot of people taking live local music for granted, and I'm not convinced that the availability of free music enabled by new technology doesn't play a role in that.

[Neb Maro]

My two cents, pesos,dracmas,yen,pistoles and so on with the various kinds of currency.

It seems like the proliferation of music via the internet and file-sharing programs is both a good and bad thing. To use an old cliche, it is a double edged sword.
On the pro side, many many people are using the internet as a forum to make their music heard. It is true that there are dominant themes scattered about; RHCP covers, Nirvana Covers, Super Mario Bros covers to name a few. The popular will always draw a large following it seems. Still, there are the original ideas scattered about. Those scattered originals might spawn copies or they might be used as springboards for more creativity. It is because the internet provides a medium for so many types and styles of music that music on the net is a good thing.
It's a bad thing because it's easier just to be a follower or to be a show off. Makes you wonder if everyone who plays their instruments or sings is actually serious or just becoming one of a string of people who want so small noteriety. Maybe that's not even a problem. I dunno. For some reason, my thoughts on the bad aren't very clear.

[tr68gt]

I'm not sure where or how to chime in on this, but I feel the need to. I've always known (as I'm sure many of us here have) that I was musically inclined, and that I hear music differently than most others. When I first picked up a bass guitar, I knew where I belonged. Having said that, I find myself not liking much of what the multitudes like. I think there's been a lot of music that has made a lot of money, but was crap. And it's still around. The glut of music out there makes it harder for me to sift through it all to find the stuff I like.

While jammin' one night one of the guys had recorded us and was playing it back, and we all thought it sounded pretty good. So he said "With all the sh!t out there now, who says we can't have a band with 4 sets of congas, and a bass and lead guitar". It sounds silly, but we couldn't argue with him.

[s.m.80808]

I appreciate all the input. I will admit that I have sound some good music via myspace, youtube etc. I also have to admit that nearly if not all the bands that I get add request from on myspace are bad. I think myspace is kind of cool for finding out what guys that used to be in the loop but aren't anymore are doing. Especially "older" (from longer than 10 years ago) artists.

Youtube/Google video is great for exposing yourself to things that weren't available too. Thanks to those sites, I have finally seen what John Coltrane, Bill Evans, Michael Hedges, Lenny Breau (etc.) looked like while playing in their prime. It isn't all bad.


I agree with tr68gt:

Originally Posted by tr68gt

. . ., I find myself not liking much of what the multitudes like.. . . The glut of music out there makes it harder for me to sift through it all to find the stuff I like.

That is the prevailig feeling especially in regards to new music (for me at least). In time, maybe the strongest acts would prevail, but honestly, look at MTV... it isn't the strongest acts that are prevailing. The ones who do are most marketable. I see a lot of new bands that are popular not because they are independant rebels, original free thinkers, or bands with something to say and communicating to listeners something with substance. I see a lot of bands with a lot of hype behind them pushing derivative music that they know will sell and smaller local acts that emulate them to cash in.

Maybe I am partially to blame too as I haven't been vigorously looking. It is hard to dedicate that time. I too hope that with great amounts of people exposed to greater amounts of music that the outcome would be better music. So far though, the trend looks like it has worked in the opposite direction. It seems like with greater numbers the neccesity for something substantive and lastin has been replaced with sheer volume.

[s.m.80808]

I take back everything I said about technology... it is wonderful.


http://www.youtube.com/p.swf?video_i...qddeDHLhrxIolZ

[jumbosilverette]

is that glenn gould?

[jumbosilverette]

Nice. Must be Gould.

[s.m.80808]

Yep.