Is Perfection Overemphasised?

New thread based on something Zoe said in the Day Jobs thread...

  On 6/21/2010 at 3:57 PM, ZoeB said:

  On 6/21/2010 at 12:08 PM, Masonic Boom said:

(That said, when I was a session player, I'd see people spending 20, 30 takes trying to get a vocal down, and they'd ask the producer "did that sound... sarcastic enough?" and I could just see the producer biting his tongue before hitting the talk back button, muttering, it sounded exactly the same as the previous 29 takes... So there's always a point you have to *stop* yourself.)

 

That brings up another interesting point: is perfection overemphasised these days? Do people now often forget that perfection isn't the only appealing aesthetic? There's so much talk about things like "analogue warmth" as the ear craves the imperfections of the gear of yesteryear... it sounds like another important aspect for those who want such a sound would be to not go out of your way to play and sing everything perfectly. Not that either approach is right, both aesthetics have their place. I listened to a lot of dub music at work a while back, and it's all the more charming for its imperfections in much the same way the Analords are. Little things like when muting a snippet of the lead vocal, the producer waits just a little too long and there's a fraction of the next syllable echoing around... It's an interesting style, I think.

We touched on this a bit in the Music Students thread, but I thought it would be an interesting topic to explore in greater detail.

Trying to get a bit more in-detail with the question I wanted to ask...

A lot of the technological advances in music of the past few years have made it more and more possible to attain a certain "perfection" very easily. Thinking about things like autotune, quantising within sequencers (in fact, it's possible to even program exactly how much randomness you want within your sequence to give the illusion of human fallibility.)

However, there's a big part of me that says that Bob Ross is right, and that mistakes are happy accidents which are to be accepted and built on. Some of the creations I've been most happy with are tracks where I was trying to do X, completely failed, and yet Y turned out to be a much more interesting direction.

On the other hand, I utterly despise the fetishisation of being "a little bit shit" as coded into musical forms such as indie-pop. But it's undeniable that the human element, that waiting just a split second too long, which sometimes makes music so engaging.

Which do you find you tend more towards in your own work, the pursuit of perfection, or the cultivation of happy accidents?

  Quote

The thing I hate the most about advertising is that it attracts all the bright' date=' creative and ambitious young people, leaving us mainly with the slow and self-obsessed to become our artists.. Modern art is a disaster area. Never in the field of human history has so much been used by so many to say so little. [/quote']

Banksy

  On 6/21/2010 at 5:01 PM, o00o said:

  Quote

The thing I hate the most about advertising is that it attracts all the bright' date=' creative and ambitious young people, leaving us mainly with the slow and self-obsessed to become our artists.. Modern art is a disaster area. Never in the field of human history has so much been used by so many to say so little. [/quote']

Banksy

 

Wait, waht?

 

Interesting quote but... context, please?

  On 6/21/2010 at 5:06 PM, Masonic Boom said:

  On 6/21/2010 at 5:01 PM, o00o said:

  Quote

The thing I hate the most about advertising is that it attracts all the bright' date=' creative and ambitious young people, leaving us mainly with the slow and self-obsessed to become our artists.. Modern art is a disaster area. Never in the field of human history has so much been used by so many to say so little. [/quote']

Banksy

 

Wait, waht?

 

Interesting quote but... context, please?

 

there is no context its just some random quote by banksy. even so he is much overhyped he is quite inspirational in what he says:

 

  Quote

The Holy Grail is to spend less time making the picture than it takes people to look at it.

  On 6/21/2010 at 5:06 PM, Masonic Boom said:

  On 6/21/2010 at 5:01 PM, o00o said:

  Quote

The thing I hate the most about advertising is that it attracts all the bright' date=' creative and ambitious young people, leaving us mainly with the slow and self-obsessed to become our artists.. Modern art is a disaster area. Never in the field of human history has so much been used by so many to say so little. [/quote']

Banksy

 

Wait, waht?

 

Interesting quote but... context, please?

 

It sounds like Banksy (the popular UK graffiti artist) twisted the words of Winston Churchill (as seen in a World War II era poster) to make a good point about modern art.

  On 6/21/2010 at 4:57 PM, Masonic Boom said:

A lot of the technological advances in music of the past few years have made it more and more possible to attain a certain "perfection" very easily.

This is where fashion rears its head again. I heard that when food was still scarce, it was fashionable to be fat. Now everyone has food, it's fashionable to be thin. Also that it was fashionable to be pale back when only the richest people could afford to stay indoors all the time rather than toiling in the fields, and now almost everyone works in offices, it's fashionable to be tanned.

Similarly, it seems that it was fashionable to make music that strove for digital perfection (think: Trevor Horn in the 80s) around about up until the point when anyone could afford such technology. Now anyone can come in off the street, spend a few hundred pounds or dollars on some entry level gear, and create something that sounds very clean, so the people who were already making music before then now want to get down and dirty to disassociate themselves with this new crowd.

I'm oversimplifying here, as always. There are other factors, such as wanting to emulate your childhood heroes (Aphex Twin emulates Larry Heard, we emulate Aphex Twin...) or otherwise hark back to the nostalgic.

I'm greedy: I want to write in almost every style I came across.

I don't think perfection is overemphasized so much as how an audience will react to it. Even the imperfections/nuances are incredibly calculated to attempt to play at people's nostalgia. It all just seems kind of dishonest to me. I always wince when I listen to music that was made solely to impress some audience, whether it be some electronic musician showing off his/her programming chops or some indy band trying really hard to sound rough and dirty and cool. There's no honest expression in it. It's as if there is some race of vampires out there mimicking what they consider to be good music in order to be the cool kid, but also to get your money. If I went to a live performance, I half expect to see them there on stage with their hands outstretched to take your money.

I'm delving into esoteric lands here, but good music is one of those things you know when you hear it. There's a certain honesty of expression, or at least some degree of cleverness to it that keeps you listening to it, and I don't think it can be readily defined in terms of production or composition.

OK, I understand that this is a bit of a weird request to make, but when talking about this stuff, can we stick to what *we* do, rather than trying to dismiss or explain the way we think other people work?

I know I harp on about this all the time, but you really don't know what the motivations of other artists are, what they are calculating, and why.

What do *you* value, in your own work, as opposed to what you hate in other artists. That's what the question is. (That said, it's entirely possible that this is the same thing. But it's an odd way to parse it.)

right now i have completely lost interest in sounding clean, crisp and produced to the max. which is funny, because i'm still obsessed with meticulous production. i want texture and chroma, dammit, and more of it. imagine if somebody went through a gallery and airbrushed and adjusted the contrast on every painting that looked a bit rough to their taste. that's the polar opposite of what i'm going for.

if anything, I feel like a lot of music these days shuns the perfection sound... it's all about grit and broken beats, and disjointed cuts. it's kind of the punk aesthetic isnt it? its DIY, cheap, and easy, and fuck if it doesn't sound perfect, its "raw"

that's not my personal perspective. ever since I began writing music on computers 13 years ago as a teenager, I was always looking for more control and ability to tweak minor details. At this point, I have a pretty good ear, and I can hear every little thing that doesn't please me, and so I then spend lots of time correcting or editing etc to make me happy with it. Basically writing for me, is like excavating a buried statue... you suddenly find a piece sticking out of the sand (your first idea) and then you start knocking off the dirt until you've gotten the outline of this idea, and then you go in, and try to pick out and brush out all the little pieces of sand and dirt that are masking exquisite, beautiful details of the statue. now, some people would love the aesthetic of a sandy statue... it has certain emotional pulls... but for me, I want to get to the essence of the idea, and make it what is is supposed to be... i wont stop until all the dust is off, and then I can feel happy. this applies to all aspects, from music to sound design, to mixing.... I feel like the end result is buried in the ether, and its my job to find it, clean it, and make it reach it's potential.

obviously this makes for it's own style... and at that point its just a matter of preference. but if someone would be to ask me what is the foundation of my personal style, I wouldn't talk about harmonic theory, or gear, or anything like that... it would be my approach to constructing my sonic worlds... carving them out and celebrating every detail.

and even though i strive for perfection in my work, itll NEVER happen... but it's like that old saying, shoot for the moon, and even if you miss, youll be among the stars.

also, here is a quote ""I must admit, not a single work ever succeeds; they all miss, naturally. Because it's the dream I try for that can't be realized." - MC Escher

and here is a ted talk about reaching mans potential... just apply what he is saying about shooting for perfection instead of being content with what is, to music instead of human potential (his part at the chalk board). aim for perfection, and you won't hit it, but youll find what IS possible.

My linkhttp://www.ted.com/talks/viktor_frankl_youth_in_search_of_meaning.html

  On 6/21/2010 at 6:37 PM, Kcinsu said:

Basically writing for me, is like excavating a buried statue... you suddenly find a piece sticking out of the sand (your first idea) and then you start knocking off the dirt until you've gotten the outline of this idea, and then you go in, and try to pick out and brush out all the little pieces of sand and dirt that are masking exquisite, beautiful details of the statue. now, some people would love the aesthetic of a sandy statue... it has certain emotional pulls... but for me, I want to get to the essence of the idea, and make it what is is supposed to be... i wont stop until all the dust is off, and then I can feel happy. this applies to all aspects, from music to sound design, to mixing.... I feel like the end result is buried in the ether, and its my job to find it, clean it, and make it reach it's potential.

^^^^^^this is an absolutely beautiful way of describing it, and a really meaningful and evocative metaphor. I completely understand this way of thinking/working.

It's a metaphor a lot of artists (not just musical but visual) use, that the music (art, sculpture) is just out there, and it's as much up to the artist to discover/uncover it. But the reception on the "universal radio" is sometimes wonky and it's like struggling to make it perfect.

For me, it's like... I don't think I will *ever* get to the point where I'm confident enough in mine own abilities to want to make a production deliberately off. I'm always convinced that it'll seem like I'm just not good enough, rather than it being a deliberate aesthetic decision (even when it is.)

That said, if I'm singing on a track, sometimes I will very deliberately leave in the blue notes, partly to keep the emotion, but also to kind of prove that I'm singing naturally, and not using autotune.

I'd never even *want* to be deliberately shit. That kind of thing will happen perfectly naturally of its own accord. (But I do recognise that mistakes can provide a kind of beauty in and of themselves - but really only when they are not deliberate mistakes - it's almost like it's something that your subconscious mind throws in as "it should really be like *this*" rather than trying to do something wrong.)

Great answer, peeps. This is really interesting to me!

yeah, and I'll note, a LOT of my writing is inspired by happy accidents and semi-random techniques.... but it's only a starting point... at the end of the day, everything you hear in my tracks are supposed to be there... I contextualize the accidents and unintended directions that present themselves to me through out the writing process.

but just to be clear, this is just my personal approach to music. I realize there many people who disagree, and make music that I love... it's all about enjoying your process, because in the end, that process is the foundation of your end result... and if you where true to your self, and enjoyed the act of creating, the end result will show it.

i've had multiple discussions with people about writing pop music. pop is some times so simple, you cant help but think "fuck I should be a millionaire for writing such simple stuff" but then you go and try to make a pop song, and its fucking hard... why? because you don't REALLY want to... say what you want about pop artists... but if youve gotten to the point that you're a successful pop artist, youve gotten there because that is what you wanted.... and so the songs were written with that intention, the artist was of that mindset... they approached it with love for the idea of the end result. so there is good pop music out there... great pop music, because people believed in it. sure there are sellouts, but they dont usually last do they?

anyways, now im rambling. the point is, approach your music in a way that you enjoy it, and the end result will at least be the product of positivity, if not the heights of your potential.

lo-fi was once undesirable in the aesthetics of "hi-fi" many years ago but now its an integral part of producing music

and besides are we talking artistic perfection or clean production?

both in my case.

Judging by how much things like autotune & digital synths are looked down on (whether or not it's for a good reason varies a lot depending on the situation), I'd say imperfection is still being sought out, but, rather ironically, it's easier to sound perfect.

  On 6/21/2010 at 7:13 PM, soundwave said:

and besides are we talking artistic perfection or clean production?

Either. Or both. However you want to interpret the question.

It's kind of about the deliberate vs. the accidental but however you want to apply that to your work.

  Quote

Perfection doesn't exist.

 

or

 

Everything is perfect.

Pick one

yes!

i emphasize whatever gets me aroused and makes me unable to sit still

perfection, imperfection -- i prefer a visceral reaction

  On 6/21/2010 at 8:27 PM, hahathhat said:

i emphasize whatever gets me aroused and makes me unable to sit still

 

perfection, imperfection -- i prefer a visceral reaction

Yes. "Does it sound better like this?" should be the sole criterion, with "better" meaning that it moves you more, or makes you want to dance more, or makes you laugh, rather than being technically better.

jah wobble made the best point when he said that there's no point trying to tweak your stuff to be perfect, life's too short.

shame i can't abide by his rules.

I aim to perfect my mistakes.

most interesting ideas are the result mistakes anyway.

It's all contextual imho. Some sounds/style will benefit from the accidental, others will not. And even then there is nearly always a point where the accidental becomes intentional. I'd dare anyone to make something completely random with their music and be happy with it. You're putting these accidents in your chosen context, at your chosen volume, and at moments of your own descretion, where is the accident?

Im not a fan of lazy production, but I cannot see the point in intentionally rough production, where things are forced out of time and out of tune. Thats kinda interesting when its the result of old warn out kit and drifting oscs, but more often than not it sits with me the same way that putting fake vinyl crackle onto a track does. yukky.

What I like, is to have an idea of the kinda sounds I wanna be making, the tone and tibre are pretty solid in my mind. But the methods are the accidental aspect. Just messing around with stuff, trying things out, untill I get a sound that gives me the response i'd been looking for. With a lot of things I know how to get the sound Im after and can go straight along that route. But a lot of the time it's nice to have a destination in mind but no clear map of how to get there.

I think it's a bit dissmisive to state that the most interesting ideas come from mistakes, since that kinda denies your own ability to create something good, but by the same token. You cant ignore any possibilities thrown up by accident. I guess i like to try and be accepting to both scenarios and find a balance between the 2.

Right now I feel like my own stuff is still far from what i think i could acheive with enough effort and time, I try my hardest with each thing, but always feel like I could go further, that it could be better. Eventually things reach a point where I'd probably get depressed if i carried on, so I'll put a temporary full stop on it, and start something new. Occasionally I'll go back to stuff to rework it. Would love to make something that felt completely perfect to my ear, but for now I just try and make it as good as I can