Here is a new music portal!

[ilovehardwell]

Hi music lovers.

Here is a new electronic music website.

http://www.ilovehardwell.com

[John_H]

Get some real instruments. That stuff's crap.

[km6xz]

In a way, and for millions, electronic music as played with a world class sound system IS a real instrument that really is a live performance. I never cared for recording electronic music my self but it is hard not to get caught up in the experience of a well done set in a massive dance festival. No one there would think it any less of a musical experience than Mozart lovers would feel towards their preference.
I would never listen to electronic music at home but it was not intended to be, it is big and needs a big stage, and big audience to get the full impact and intent of the music. Standing in the middle of 25,000 dancers, a good DJ can create an atmosphere that is almost unique in its impact and influence on the audience's emotions, movements, energy and impressions. From your comments I assume you have not experienced a big dance festival. It is more common in Europe but the US, Asia and other regions have their fair share of fans. By the way, Hardwell is one of the new rising stars in international big festivals.
I prefer small dance clubs for my weekly exercise but attend at least one dance big festival each year in some country and really enjoy it. It is not songs or artists as much as experience of the interactive event that never existed before or after that moment where thousands of people, gigantic clean system, a suitable space and creative input from the stage combine to present an experience not felt any other way. I guess the analogy for similar feeling of community energy and unity is closest to that DeadHeads got from Dead performances. In neither case does it do it justice to hear it from recordings, it has to be experienced live. Don't even bother listening to recordings, on any system that could fit in a home, and with less than a few thousands others in the same environment. A good DJ "plays " the audience just as much as sound generators to create the experience.
One thing observation over the year, real dance fans are one of the best crowds, these are not poser disco goers where flash, posture and attitude rule. You will not see guns or violence or even attitude, and the big dance events are probably the safest experience you can find involving thousands of people.
If you have a chance, go to a big dance festival and see if your opinion of the music, people and atmosphere is not a whole lot more favorable coming out than going in. You will definitely not be indifferent.

[John_H]

In a way, and for millions, electronic music ...

You make good points, but still even you admit recorded "electronica" is pretty lame. I will admit though that utilizing the technology as an art form is becoming more accepted. I'm biased though.

...If you have a chance, go to a big dance festival and see if your opinion of the music, people and atmosphere is not a whole lot more favorable coming out than going in. You will definitely not be indifferent.

Millions of people treat it as a lifestyle. They're very similar to Deadhead's in that respect. The EDC happens every year just up the road from where I live. I did some stagehand stuff there a couple times, so I've seen it in it's largest format with well over 100k in attendance. It's an Ecstasy fueled celebration of redundancy. The only thing keeping me there was the paycheck.

[Audiotexan]

Your "old fart" is showing John. ;P

I'm biased though.

And I respect that you acknowledge and admit that. lol
I'm much the same in many other respects.

Millions of people treat it as a lifestyle. They're very similar to Deadhead's in that respect.

And there's millions that dont. I saw quite the sub-culture that you're referring to around DFW back in the 90's, so I'm not disputing your claim at all. It's definitely there to some degree. But there's a lot more that appreciate it for what it is, and IMHO it takes the same talent to put together something that creates emotion, regardless of the instrument (or accessories) used.

There's also a ton of technically proficient folks that use a 'real instrument' (as you imply above), that couldn't write a melody or evoke any type of emotion whatsoever.

Think how the "old folks" then, thought of Hendrix ("that's crap. why's there so much distortion? why's it sound like he's choking a child [wah-wah]?")

The EDC happens every year just up the road from where I live. I did some stagehand stuff there a couple times, so I've seen it in it's largest format with well over 100k in attendance. It's an Ecstasy fueled celebration of redundancy. The only thing keeping me there was the paycheck.

And I'd imagine the USA's 'interpretation' of a dance/electronic music festival is quite different than one in the EU/other areas of the world.

It's an Ecstasy fueled celebration of redundancy.

Love the quote, but look at Woodstock. Compare as appropriate. lol
It's all music if it brings an emotion/makes someone happy!

Love ya John! *grins*
Just had to yank your chain man.

I do respect that ya don't care for it though.
I can only take so much myself, but there is some out there that's really good. And just like my 'preferred styles' of music to listen to, a LOT more that isn't good at all. But there's no disputing that it's legit and it's music! At least in the world I live in.

[Audiotexan]

Funny how life works sometimes...

I stumbled across an interesting read (that's eerily on target here) while I was looking to help another thread with schematics for a Sound City 30.

Dave Grohl, Sound City, and The Great Analog Debate - UniqueSquared Pro Audio Blog

Basically, it's simple truths re: nostalgia vs industry vs financial vs generational...

[km6xz]

Interesting article, a subject I have written about in articles and blog posts a number of times in the last few decades. I got out of the music business after many years due to digital, directly and indirectly. The main reason was supporting a large production facility larger than Sound City, with more gold, after the record labels had all been taken over by larger entertainment companies who put lawyers and accountant in as top management. They concluded that they only wanted artists with current hits and were only willing to invest in new artists about 1/10 the historic average in the late 1980-early 1990s.
A new group would be given a 1 album deal, and $25,000 and told to go buy some ADATs or home gear and record it themselves. Suddenly even $25k was considered generous while a large production facility with top pros in every position from reception to maintenance was not possible unless one became a production company doing in-house projects to license to labels. That is why the majority of pros with real chops left the industry in the 90s, could not feed the family. In the years before that most of the production talent, the varied teams that made up the production process of a great record was all concentrated in a few studios. At any given time 8-9 different studios accounted for 80% of top records, with a varying cast of studios but still limited to around that number. There were thousands of competent demo studios because labels before the 90s paid good money for 3-5 song demos not one to see how the group worked but to flesh out some of the songs. About 10 demos were recorded for every major label release. There was a two tiered system, demo studios dominated one niche and did not do albums and album studios did not do demos so there was a non-competitive symbiotic relationship between them. When the production talent is concentrated in just a number of top studio, you can see how the production teams could be expected to be pretty darn good.
They were since the best and brightest could be picked from. But it took that concentration to generate the high rates of recording successes that existed in the 50s through late 80sm where only 8-9% of all major label releases failed to recoup in the first year. If foreign licensing was added into the mix, almost no records lost money. After the suits took over the labels by '92, the successes became rare and in fact only 10-12% made a profit and a much small number of major label releases compared to decades before meant there was a major shift the way the business worked and what share the studio,producer, artist got out of it. By that time the whole industry had collapsed and took FM radio and touring industries with them. The relationship between touring, radio and labels was severed in 1989 so each industry tanked.
The suits did not want acts that did not have hits, even if the journeyman acts, the household names that consistently sold 300k-500k to strong fan bases built up over years were all released. They wanted hits and did not care about how those released acts were no-brainer modest profit makers since they sold without any promotion. Those acts were the base income for the industry for 60 years. The biggest single blunder by the suits was to stop promoting through radio as regional markets and instead treat the US as one market reached "better" by MTV in 1988-89. That shift raised the cost and risk of failure by 10-20 times for each record. It meant the key advantage records had over other industries was the extreme efficiency of Just in Time Inventory Control that helped prevent the labels from ever being stuck with unsold excess inventory. Something they invented in the late 40s and later was adopted by the Japanese in auto making that crushed Detroit. To work it needed to have regional markets that did not depend on the exact same product in the bins at the same time. A typical pressing was 24k records for a region and repeating that until sales started to stall and then it would be pushed, both radio play and inventory shifted to another region.
After the shift to MTV as one national market, to have any record in any bin available to buy, it meant filling every record bin in the country with a few copies at the same exact time. So initial pressings had to be 500,000 or more even before they found out if anyone at all wanted it. It also meant each single picked by the labels had to have a video that cost 10 times more to produce than the song itself. That, again was before anyone knew which song if any really should have been a single. So it is surprising they survived at all. Radio never recovered and died, and became giveaway priced fodder for consolidators like Clear Channel which bought licenses for a couple thousand dollars that in 1985 were worth $3million. Right wing talk radio and sports because the only viable use of radio.

Anyway, I did not have a problem with digital per se, it is a tool and the song matters, gear does not. I bought one of the first Sony DASH 24 track digital decks(1984 $124k for the deck and $19k for the remote) mainly as a rental for $1200-1500 a day.
My biggest grip with digital was the process and work flow encouraged really poor song writing. Analog production was somewhat organic and flowed much like the song creation for centuries.
Digital adopted a random access model that left the lyrics and meaning of the song to be tacked on at the very end. Starting the song writing with a beat box and layering really changed song writing and it has not been for the better. It is harder than ever to spot a well crafted song that means something due to the rhythmic foundation of song writing whereas traditionally melody, which has an entirely different impact on the brain, was the foundation and arrangements followed. In most cases, the entire production team knew the meaning and intent of the song from day one because of the lyrics and melody foundation. So we always knew if we were on the right track because from day one the basics were heard and the song made sense.
As far as the importance of consoles, like the Neve in the article, it is a non-issue the same way guitar players insist their success is based on which tubes are used or which capacitors are used. Nonsense. A compelling, evocative song makes itself the new reference point of what is desired, not the "tone". Tone became desired solely because it evokes memory of the song that introduced it to the seeker trying to recapture the feeling in their own work. All the "hot tones" someone can point to, we new and rejected by most people at one time. But all can trace their "conversion" to an individual song that meant something to the listener happened to have it.

I like analog because it was a fun process of recording and it fit me, I hate recording with computers and prefer to sweep streets than do it. Digital tape, r-t-r was fine for me but my chops were developed by getting analog to sound less sucky and the tricks and techniques did not translate well to digital which had its own set of suckiness. What turns song writing has taken is the biggest disappointment in music however. A Great song transcend gear and technology but bad songs suck regardless. More shitty songs are recorded today because more people can record for almost nothing and never have to get good to do it. So the mass of bad songs that were produced solely because they were cheap enough to do, whereas in the old days someone with some chops had to pass judgement before the sizable investment was made, meant that not that many horrible songs made it to the market. Now, there is no one with taste or judgement is in the process from song writing, recording and release. Essentially song writing, production, arrangements, and marketing is all done by one person and no matter how great they think they are, no one is an expert in each of these different fields. Before, a team of highly talented people were part of the creation of the music and there was a much higher level of competence in the room.
Good songs have always been the hardest part of music but now it is so much harder to find well crafted songs in the sea of crap solely because there is so much more out that never would have had to been sifted through to find the good songs. The major labels release very few records and they focus primarily on cross-over celebrity stars and not music at all.

[Audiotexan]

Thanks for chiming in Stan. Again, amazingly insightful information for those of us who weren't there (or at least privy to the inside).

There was a two tiered system, demo studios dominated one niche and did not do albums and album studios did not do demos so there was a non-competitive symbiotic relationship between them.

I do recall that! Back in the late 70s-early 80s, I had older friends that were in local bands in San Antonio that would often talk about getting money together for demos...and bought several (still have a few of those tapes actually) from them.

After the suits took over the labels by '92, the successes became rare and in fact only 10-12% made a profit and a much small number of major label releases compared to decades before meant there was a major shift the way the business worked and what share the studio,producer, artist got out of it.

That's because they'd long since lost nurturing 'talent', and started looking for the crap that'd gaurentee millions in short order.

I have to wonder if it didn't start even earlier, say, with the boy band crap in the 80s? [NKOTB, Menudo, New Edition, etc]

By that time the whole industry had collapsed and took FM radio and touring industries with them. The relationship between touring, radio and labels was severed in 1989 so each industry tanked.

Would love to hear more from you on this!

The suits did not want acts that did not have hits, even if the journeyman acts, the household names that consistently sold 300k-500k to strong fan bases built up over years were all released. They wanted hits and did not care about how those released acts were no-brainer modest profit makers since they sold without any promotion. Those acts were the base income for the industry for 60 years.

Nothing like building your own casket! =D
Serves them right too. As painful as it is to have to endure the 'rebirth' of an industry, it's SO pleasing to watch the suits flush.
After watching them rip off both the artists and consumers for so many years, it's lovely to see their greed cost them the entire industry.

I couldn't believe what entailed a 'standard Motown contract' when I learned about it in the VH interviews on YouTube. And still can't believe that it went on as recently as the late 70s when Van Halen got signed. Still taking 10% off the top for breakage on a format that was at death's door (vinyl) *at that time*??? Cassettes were already in full force, and Cd's were on the doorstep. It's not like the 50-60s where vinyl was 100% of the medium. But they still took the money off the top like it was 100%. Greedy $#%^s.

Radio never recovered and died, and became giveaway priced fodder for consolidators like Clear Channel which bought licenses for a couple thousand dollars that in 1985 were worth $3million.

That's just mind-blowing. What 'licenses' are you referring to? General broadcast rights? Full artist/label libraries? Or...?

Anyway, I did not have a problem with digital per se, it is a tool and the song matters, gear does not.

Spot on. And whole-heartedly agree.

My biggest grip with digital was the process and work flow encouraged really poor song writing. Analog production was somewhat organic and flowed much like the song creation for centuries.

Not having ever professionally recorded anything, I'm at a disadvantage here. And I've never appreciated the reason for all the middle-men as a result.

Recording engineer
producer
mixing
mastering
and on and on...

The whole process has always seemed artificially convoluted to me. (But again, I'm realizing as I make these comments, and that we are where we are [MEF] that I get alot of the reasons behind why alot of them are needed for the average musician, as they have no clue about normalization, one frequency stepping on another, phasing, etc. They just play. Whereas, I just take them for granted, and I expect that I'll account for it as I go, just by my nature/knowledge.)

So I guess basically it's not so much that I don't appreciate them. I just disdain such a finite and closed loop system.

Digital adopted a random access model that left the lyrics and meaning of the song to be tacked on at the very end.

I blame the change in intelligence level/attention spans personally. As well as the change in the public in what they'll accept/buy. The whole common denominator has dropped in most cases. At least in the US. But I know it's not just us...but I can't speak to the others firsthand, so I won't!

If they didn't buy/swallow this crap, it wouldn't be marketed/sold. No demand, no supply necessary.

But instead we have a population of folks that prefer to turn idiots into celebrities. "She Bangs She Bangs" Korean guy...really? He has an album. REALLY??? >.<

Couple that with all the crap that is on YouTube, much less on TV (Looking at you American Idol/offshoots).

Starting the song writing with a beat box and layering really changed song writing and it has not been for the better.

Have to disagree with you here however, as I can't see that as being any different whatsoever than a drummer laying out a beat that someone starts plucking a guitar/bass to...then the singer says "Hey! Run with that a moment!!" It's all 'inspiration'.

Unless you mean those that rely on nothing but canned tracks, and not tailoring them to fit the song as appropriate. Then yes, I'd totally get your point, and again, agree.

It is harder than ever to spot a well crafted song that means something due to the rhythmic foundation of song writing whereas traditionally melody, which has an entirely different impact on the brain, was the foundation and arrangements followed.

I completely agree. It's an art in/of itself that's getting closer and closer to completely forgotten currently. Hopefully though, like most revered arts, it will come full circle. And the sooner the better. It'd be a shame to lose that level of songcraft.

In most cases, the entire production team knew the meaning and intent of the song from day one because of the lyrics and melody foundation. So we always knew if we were on the right track because from day one the basics were heard and the song made sense.

The only problem with that 'methodology' is the Motown sound.
And we had similar pigeon-holing in the rock world too, it just never got the same level of moniker (as least AFAIR offhand). But alot of bands sound like alot of others through the 70s, then the 80s, then.... So there is something to be said again about the same folks producing the same crap. There was more variety in the musical content/lyrics however. But production levels were the same old same old on so much...

If you stick to only one 'process' then everyone that goes in that blender comes out smelling like it to a large degree. :/
That, or I'm missing the point you're trying to make (which is quite probably more likely knowing myself).

What turns song writing has taken is the biggest disappointment in music however. A Great song transcend gear and technology but bad songs suck regardless.

Truth!

Essentially song writing, production, arrangements, and marketing is all done by one person and no matter how great they think they are, no one is an expert in each of these different fields.

True again! However, it's easier now for those with backgrounds such as ours (speaking cumulatively of MEF) to be able to put out a product with technical proficiency, and be able to grow into an area that we were previously locked out of!

Not to mention all the sub-genres/new talent that are being exposed/listened to by folks that wouldn't have otherwise done so, simply because they were SO tired of the same old same old that has been spewing forth from the record conglomerates/AOR for at least two decades now (in my case).

I wanted to cry when a local 'record store' (which was actually more of less of a 'front' for a major A&R guy in the St Louis area to unload/sell all of his/her boxes and boxes of promo copies) was understandably 'forcibly' closed down. I'm amazed it was there as many years as it was to be honest. I'd go in there and spend quite literally HOURS previewing new music at their listening stations. Primarily because all of the stuff on the radio sucked. Picked out *many* 'winners' out of there too, as often times, I'd have bought the promo copy, and then the band goes national. So I was proud to have an ear for it. But at the same time, a lot of stuff that I bought and love, never made it big, and I would have never been exposed to if not for that store! Until years later and the "invasion of the internet".

But again, I acknowledge that I'm unique in that aspect, as even my friends that "love music" gave me a hard time about it when I did that! lol

Good songs have always been the hardest part of music but now it is so much harder to find well crafted songs in the sea of crap solely because there is so much more out that never would have had to been sifted through to find the good songs. The major labels release very few records and they focus primarily on cross-over celebrity stars and not music at all.

True enough.

But personally? I'd rather have to navigate a wider path to find a road worth turning down, then to have a more limited selection of finely tuned regurgitation.

What I wish we had, was a central source to peruse it all. I'd spend hours on end there. Literally. Then I could buy as I like, and ideally with the money going directly to the artist. Minimal middle-men, and the money going to the person/people that deserve(s) it most.

[John_H]

That's a good article. I have a friend who was a very successful award winning producer in the 70's, and another who manages a studio currently, so I can personally relate to industry pro's from both ends of the spectrum.

Although a 2" - 24 track deck is a wonderful thing, listening to a 96/192 bit recording on a big playback system will make you a believer. Like discussed in the article, what sickens me mostly is things like autotune, or pitch correction that with a couple of mouse clicks dehumanizes the performance. Perhaps what the future has in store for us is this sterile, processed, unimaginative, "perfect" sound, but I'd rather hear The Doors, or Jefferson Airplane coming from my loudspeakers. I guess I am turning into the stodgy curmudgeon who shakes his fist at new trends.

...It feels like a reassuring pat on the back to the aged disco hating rocker who laments in lonely despair about how today’s music is not real music.

<made me smile>

[Audiotexan]

I guess I am turning into the stodgy curmudgeon who shakes his fist at new trends.

I've been there for some years now.

Hi John, welcome to the mud!
My name's Rob, but just call me 'Stick'.
Damn fine to meet you!

...It feels like a reassuring pat on the back to the aged disco hating rocker who laments in lonely despair about how today’s music is not real music.

<made me smile>

I actually laughed out loud.
The REALLY funny part? I almost quoted that exact line for you...and instead you picked out!

Seriously though, thanks for not taking offense!
Funnier still? I'm pretty much of the same opinion. Alot of "today's" music is crap. But I try to keep an open mind across the board.

The odd part? I LOVE funk, but hate disco. Talk about a thin line to walk in the late 70s/early 80s. :X lol

[Enzo]

Have to disagree with you here however, as I can't see that as being any different whatsoever than a drummer laying out a beat that someone starts plucking a guitar/bass to...then the singer says "Hey! Run with that a moment!!" It's all 'inspiration'.

You lose all the creative input from the drummer. The drummer with any talent is more than "Hey Bob, gimme a 4/4". The drum box will never ask if you like this or that will work, drum box never suggests. A drum box never doodles between takes and comes up with a groove.


Off top of my mind and from my era, listen to Mitch Mitchell or Keith Moon and tell me a drum box would sound remotely similar, and further that drummers like that would not be influencing the rest of the band.

[John_H]

I've been there for some years now...

I know what you mean. I've always considered myself pretty hip, but it's time to recalculate.

...Seriously though, thanks for not taking offense! ...

Not at all. It cracks me up when people get butthurt if you don't like the same music as them, or criticize their favorite artist. I'm only bothered when people think they have to share it with me by blasting their 9,000 watt car stereo when they drive by my house.

My Daughter is a punk rocker, and has been playing in bands for 20 years. My son is so Metal that when it rains he will rust. Both of them are fine musicians in their own respect, and neither has much room for hip hop, electronica, or rap. Their favorite songs are usually the one's they've just written. I take great pride in their abilities as musician's. The lessons, and support paid huge dividends for me. It has always kept our bond strong.

...The odd part? I LOVE funk, but hate disco. Talk about a thin line to walk in the late 70s/early 80s. :X lol

I've always listened to a broad mix of music. Most disco was a huge waste of vinyl. At that period in time I was listening to about "anything but".

[John_H]

You lose all the creative input from the drummer. The drummer with any talent is more than "Hey Bob, gimme a 4/4". The drum box will never ask if you like this or that will work, drum box never suggests. A drum box never doodles between takes and comes up with a groove.


Off top of my mind and from my era, listen to Mitch Mitchell or Keith Moon and tell me a drum box would sound remotely similar, and further that drummers like that would not be influencing the rest of the band.

Most of my favorite bands had two drummers! Phil Collins was a master a layering drums in the studio. Listen to "No Jacket Required" on a good set of cans and pay attention to the percussion. It's amazing.

[Audiotexan]

Originally Posted by km6xz:
Starting the song writing with a beat box and layering really changed song writing and it has not been for the better.

Have to disagree with you here however, as I can't see that as being any different whatsoever than a drummer laying out a beat that someone starts plucking a guitar/bass to...then the singer says "Hey! Run with that a moment!!" It's all 'inspiration'.

You lose all the creative input from the drummer. The drummer with any talent is more than "Hey Bob, gimme a 4/4". The drum box will never ask if you like this or that will work, drum box never suggests. A drum box never doodles between takes and comes up with a groove.

I agree with you completely that there is definitely something lost (and something to be said for human interaction being contributing factors)...I was just talking in general as to how it doesn't matter how a song starts. More importantly, the creativity or inspiration is the key. A drum track by a talented/patient programmer can still inspire, it's just different is all. Not to mention takes way longer to program. And it's not 'off the cuff'.

To me, that in itself is the major downside/cost for the loss of human interaction. However, most drummers I've met/worked with had a short attention span anyways. Can't keep 'em quiet when you're wanting to sort a part out, kinda like us guitarists... lol

I'm guessing I still don't understand what Stan was trying to say by the layering comment more than anything. As there's so many layering tracks with real musicians...

Nothing against either methodology. Just that they both have a use. And just like real musicians, both can be done well, or poorly.

[Enzo]

"Real musicians" might lay down tracks, but look at it this way:

DaVinci painted the Mona Lisa. I bet he could also paint his garage. That isn't the same as a garage painter trying to come up with the Mona Lisa. Sure it is a lot or work to put together a drum track. Just that drum track will never pause and say "Hey, what if right her we did this...?"


On the other hand, I stepped into a bar one evening, and a couple friends of mine happened to be playing on stage. They were a two piece with a drum machine. I bought three drinks and had them delivered to the band.