The music of the 70s impressed me every time.
Can i make music like in the 70s with Reaper?
Can Reaper be one of my "BeeGees" or will Reaper leave me with a heart of glass?
Or will Reaper wake me up before you go...?
__________________
using Ableton Live 9 Suite, Push 2, Reaper, Intua Beatmaker 2, E-MU X-Board, Steinberg UR22 MK2, ESI Juli@ Soundcard
Started with Soundblaster and great Modeditors and Turtle Beach Tropez Sample Soundcard
__________________
using Ableton Live 9 Suite, Push 2, Reaper, Intua Beatmaker 2, E-MU X-Board, Steinberg UR22 MK2, ESI Juli@ Soundcard
Started with Soundblaster and great Modeditors and Turtle Beach Tropez Sample Soundcard
but then again: why dont you make the music you are missing?
yeah.... i should.
I think about a sabbatical.
In this time i can do ANYTHING i want to
.. just a little bit of talent
__________________
using Ableton Live 9 Suite, Push 2, Reaper, Intua Beatmaker 2, E-MU X-Board, Steinberg UR22 MK2, ESI Juli@ Soundcard
Started with Soundblaster and great Modeditors and Turtle Beach Tropez Sample Soundcard
__________________ Windows 10x64 | AMD Ryzen 3700X | ATI FirePro 2100 | Marian Seraph AD2, 4.3.8 | Yamaha Steinberg MR816x "If I can hear well, then everything I do is right" (Allen Sides)
but then again: why dont you make the music you are missing?
In a way, that's something that we all owe to the world community. That's how we contribute to our cultural heritage.
As a hobbyist musician, I can afford to be free, to make music by my own standards and rules. I didn't really understand this ten years ago, wasted too much time trying to make X or sound like Y. Or maybe I was just trying to avoid the much harder challenge of sounding like the Noise Construct? Because that's the music missing from my record collection.
If you have a google you can find the multitrack of "Long train running" by the Doobie Bros. Load it up and have a play and listen to the parts. Talk about mastery of the art.
If you have a google you can find the multitrack of "Long train running" by the Doobie Bros. Load it up and have a play and listen to the parts. Talk about mastery of the art.
Live in the here and now
Learn from the past
Don´t put obstacles in your future´s way
by moving and looking backwards only - in thoughts and action
Give the future a chance
(even though music was much better back then haha)
but stop complaining about the present and praising the past. that was wrong at all times.
make the present better and shape this way the future.
and if you are a so-called "amateur" (what does only mean that you dont get enough money out of making music, not that you are bad or worse than the so-called "pros") you are independent and free, that is a gift.
defend your freedom at all cost and dont defend what others tell you what your "freedom" would be. they lie. that rule goes for art and politics the same way.
so making the music you miss is a very political thing. it states real freedom.
You can't endlessly recreate the same buzz with the same music - firstly because the music gets repetitive and less exciting, secondly because the environment in which the music exists, and to which it relates, is changing.
There is some music which many people consider is timeless - that might be just romance for the past, or it may have some truth. Certainly some music seems to endure while other stuff fades.
So how can it endure outside of the "zeitgeist"?
Maybe some music hits on a deeper primal level, or an evolving understanding, or both.
If that's true, then it makes sense to say that some music is somehow "better" than others - because it connects with the zeitgeist and/or leaves a lasting impression.
__
imo, that's true of some 60's and 70's music, as well as other stuff.
A set of circumstances aligned - electric guitars and amps were relatively new, the riffs and chord structures weren't so predictable as they seem now, society was becoming less rigid which fed back into a vibe of excitement and exploration....
__
When you add all that to the fact that western music structures are limited and you can't keep inventing exciting new variations on major and minor, it seems inevitable that the possibilities for innovation become narrower.
Just because you keep trying doesn't mean you're entitled to get somewhere.
It might well be that music itself - certainly pop music - has reached a barrier or an uphill struggle after 60 years of exploring.
__
So yes, the 70's were in many ways better than now, for music at least.
...........
and if you are a so-called "amateur" (what does only mean that you dont get enough money out of making music, not that you are bad or worse than the so-called "pros") you are independent and free, that is a gift....
Amateur (French amateur "lover of", from Old French and ultimately from Latin amatorem nom. amator, "lover")
When I look at music in a historical way - and of course, based on my own taste - I think popular music took a sharp nosedive during the 60's that continued right through the 70's - it became more and more simplified, distilled - it closed the mind - became hedonistic only - rather than opened it.
When I look at music in a historical way - and of course, based on my own taste - I think popular music took a sharp nosedive during the 60's that continued right through the 70's - it became more and more simplified, distilled - it closed the mind - became hedonistic only - rather than opened it.
What was hedonistic about Simon and Garfunkell, James Taylor, ABBA, Paul and Linda McCartney, Carol King, The Moody Blues etc?
They were the amongst the biggest sellers of the early 70's.
Of course you had bands you might describe as "hedonistic" - The Doors, Led Zeppelin, The Beatles, T-Rex alongside that whole variety of acoustic stuff.
These are just the top album sellers - the actual charts diversity and beyond was much wider.
Where's all the diversity in the popular names these days?
I know the environment for music has changed - but surely we're talking about what was the general vibe of a decade? What people were exposed to everyday and what therefore made up the general culture.
If anything it's much more closed now - a dominance of the same heavily produced mixes taking over from the content.
What "variety" there is on a "general public" level - say for instance acoustic stuff like Ed Sheerin - probably wouldn't have been good enough to be signed in the 70's.
Maybe on topic, but also maybe not, but it comes down to taste right?
In saying that, for me at least, great songs from the 60's/70's, and possibly even 50's are timeless and are still thoroughly enjoyed by me today, and sometimes you can go back and find the album that the band released the song on, and find hidden gems in there also.
80's? yeah i loved it, i was between 8 and 18 years old, so a big part of my youth and we still love to hear songs as part of reminiscing at how daggy we were. But not as many songs, to me, stood the test of time and remain classics to me up to this very day.
90's? I got disenchanted here in Australia with all the dance music for the first few years, bands like U2 and INXS etc losing the plot. But yes we had the STP's Nirvana's Smashing Pumpkins, Sound garden, Alice in Chains, Oasis, radiohead, pearl jams etc etc, but, again, to me, these songs i don't think will be classics down the track..
2000 onwards. marketing has changed dramatically, and songs have changed, which is not a bad thing. A % of people no longer get excited about getting an album, opening it up and reading the stuff and looking at pics etc, following bands through each album etc.. people just download a song cause it's the latest flavor and 6 months later its forgotten for the newest flavor. Personally i can't think of any song that i can say right now was great, and is still great.
Kinda like how we loved the roast meal once a week etc...now we just eat ready made or quick meals for their convenience. Guess which meals will i remember as classics....
So maybe it comes down to your own influences and experiences with how you got into music, because not everyone will agree with the above.
So you can't play it then... See I'm not trashing any generation, I'm pushing you to listen instead of debate because all music decades contains good things to learn if one is truly interested in being a musician. Again report back when you can actually play it and/or understand what makes it feel like it does - especially the latter. If not then...
__________________ Music is what feelings sound like.
Last edited by karbomusic; 12-19-2015 at 09:24 AM.
lol... yes because we know if you don't recognize the talent, you obviously cannot play it
karbo, come on man.
Jason, I wouldn't be telling you this outside of sincerity. If you want to play this immature 'talent' word game have at it but that is not the reason for my reply to you. Challenging you to learn it has implications you will never understand until you try but it is obvious you and I are on completely different levels here. Your dismissiveness doesn't reflect well in that regard.
I think you are usually a good open minded guy... Learning something often causes one to appreciate things they don't realize at first and often dismiss, you should get that by now.
__________________ Music is what feelings sound like.
Last edited by karbomusic; 12-19-2015 at 10:18 AM.
talent is ubiquitous now, and didn't just exist in the 70s
And there we have it, Jason takes the usual road of anyone stating anything outside his generation must = trashing his generation. You do know I had to go 'back' to 60s and 70s myself correct? Of course I visited the 30s, 40s and 50s as well and those guys had 'talent' too. You may also notice I didn't trash yours, I was offering up stuff to be appreciated and learned from as a musician, when it occurred is only a marker for study, nothing more.
__________________ Music is what feelings sound like.
Last edited by karbomusic; 12-19-2015 at 09:57 AM.
The musicians in the 50's-80's-ish grew up in a generation where taking piano lessons was a rather standard part of childhood education, where singing in the church choir was an expected obligation to your community, where musical education in school was based on achievement and not simply participation... music today is crap because musicians today are crap... everybody wants a pat on the back for not being able to read music, not being able to play off of a numeric chord chart (i.e. "I VI II V in A"), not being able to harmonize vocally, and more than anything, not willing to put any time or effort into improving themselves because that would mean "shaming one's uniqueness"... musicians today aren't talented at music: they're cool popular people who have decided that their preferred social shtick is "musician", so they learn 4 chords on the guitar, grow long hair or a beard, and go play sensitive songs at the local bar that serves locally brewed organic walnut beer or something, and have sex with equally dingy college girls... there's always one thing missing - good songs... vocal lines that you catch yourself humming at work... that's what the 70's had... ACTUAL musicians making ACTUAL music... not this pathetic synthesis/social currency that goes on today...
When I look at music in a historical way - and of course, based on my own taste - I think popular music took a sharp nosedive during the 60's that continued right through the 70's - it became more and more simplified, distilled - it closed the mind - became hedonistic only - rather than opened it.
Well, that's interesting thoughts.
Must say though that much of the music I loved from my youth was from the 70s. Led Zeppelin, Genesis, Pink Floyd.
Then it's the pre-digital vs. digital era thing.
I love digital and how easy it is for everyone to make music,
yet the threshold in itself for getting near a mic back in "the days" and the organic nature of many of the recordings, and everyone involved, it does really give some quality.
But as an idea-historic statement,
I 99% agree with you