Technology versus Creativity

I was thinking today how fast music technology is evolving and how much easier it gets to do things that just a few years ago would require to really break your head to find a solution/workaround...and that lead me to thought that maybe there is some kind correlation with progress of technology/ regress of creativity. Idm peaked before technology allowed virtually everyone to do that really complicated stuff, you just had to try too hard for most people to be able to do it. But when this better technology arrived also idm pioneers moved on to it and IMO they never reached the same level of innovation/creativity again. I mean, it is not a secret that limitations really bring out the creativity. Maybe we have reached a level of technology when it actually is doing more harm than good for music as a form of human expression? All that melodyne, live, bitwig etc stuff that everyone is so excited about...you almost doesn`t have to listen anymore, you can just look at monitor and click away. And people do. Maybe I`m saying so because I`m kind of oldish but that`s what most this EDM stuff to me sounds like, like it`s made by computers using the same algorithms. So what do you think, can you relate to that? Do I have a point? Is technology making our minds too lazy and thus killing creativity and originality?

Sorry for the rant but I feel kind of stuck lately and I think partially it might have to do something with the fact that most of the stuff I can think of is just so easy to achieve with available tools that to a certain degree it takes the challenge and fun out of creating music so I don`t even want to bother clicking away anymore...

Could be. I know from experience I actually feel less creative when there are more tools/options available, like it just becomes clutter at a certain point.

Even from a cultural standpoint, all this access to smartphones and high-end video games seems to take away room for inspiration, and by extension, will to create. I'm guilty of this as well.

Exactly, you kind of just consume for the fun of consuming...and you want new features just for the sake of novelty.

And the biggest thing in electronic music in last years has been Burial who made his style by using simplest of tools- just a wave editor, not some magic technology available only to him.

find an element about music that excites you and focus on that. is it melody, drums, tones/textures? those are the types of things at the heart of what your final product is going to be. it isn't going to be technology, it's going to be music made with technology. music comprised of melodies, rhythms, timbres, etc.

the technology doesn't pick that stuff out for you. it might generate some or all of those elements depending on how you do what you do, but you are at least picking what to keep. something has to excite you. and if nothing is, then you need to find some different tech to use to generate those things that do excite you. or just learn a bit of music theory, or get nitty gritty with experimenting...

options shouldnt turn you off. people back in the 70s prob thought the same thing about all the possibilities they had. or back whenever multi-tracking first started getting used a lot. it probably seemed incredible and limitless to them in some ways. dont focus on the tech focus on what you want to do and then just pick the tech you need to do it.

as far as doing what you want being easy to do blindfolded or whatever, and people just using progs to make stuff for them... well if lots of people are doing that then their stuff will sound very similar. stuff that stands out will ALWAYS... er, stand out. that will never change. so maybe you should see the tech as a challenge. can you use your brain to make something that blows away what all the other people are doing with programs that instantly spit out 'cool noises' or 'good sounding chill loops' or whatever? nobody is going to make the RDJ album just by throwing loops together or clicking start on a generative program.

  On 2/1/2013 at 7:36 AM, zemudene said:

Exactly, you kind of just consume for the fun of consuming...and you want new features just for the sake of novelty.

 

And the biggest thing in electronic music in last years has been Burial who made his style by using simplest of tools- just a wave editor, not some magic technology available only to him.

Back in the turn of the millenium (1999-2000) all I used were Stomper Ultra ++ (a simple drum synth programme) and an early version of Cool Edit to make an EP. Ever since I started using FL Studio in 2003 tracks became much easier to sequence, but in a way I feel like I sacrificed creativity in the process.

Maybe it parallels the Industrial Revolution, albeit on a much smaller scale. Things become easier to mass-produce, but then it becomes too easy to focus on quantity, rather than an individual unit. A product of automated machines just isn't unique like something hand-crafted. It's like using a cookie-cutter as opposed to trimming shapes of cookie dough from scratch.

If IDM was the peak of creativity then I don't want to live anymore.

Come on, man. You don't honestly think that because we move into a new era of music making everything will sound the same, everything will be mediocre, and that everything all of a sudden becomes easier to make. I'm sorry if I come off as a bit of a dick now, but if everyone was still making shitty IDM that sounded like something coming straight from the 90s then that would be even more depressing. Technology doesn't put a hold on creativity. Quite the contrary. It helps, or at least it SHOULD help, people to find new ways of dealing with the whatever it is they're working with - music, videos, photos etc. - and help them make it easier for them to explore new territories that they couldn't before.

good thread, the weird thing to me now about musical technology is a lot of the more popular 'underground' stuff is utilizing modern technology on a computer to emulate the sound of an old tape machine or 4 track recorder all the way down to fake tape hiss and record crackle.

I think we're on our way into a new era where the term 'electronic music' is becoming outdated. The term was relevant when the technology defined the music itself, and as you said 'peaked' with the big IDM pioneers putting out stuff like Go Plastic, Drukqs, Confield, Draft 7.30, etc. Now that so many techniques have been stripped of their mystery like with Glitch VST it makes those same sounds less exciting. They were more exciting when you had no fucking idea how they were done quickly, you imagined people meticulously working on a loop for hours like some kind of grain at a time sand mural.

Right now i think we're are a strange crossroads with music technology. Almost anything you can imagine you can make with cracked software and a computer under $500. Want to do a full orchestral movie score? Download a 200gig sampling library and with little effort it can sound Hollywood quality. Can't find a drummer in your rock track but want realistic sounding performances? Easy, just get a plugin in the vein of BFD and 99.5% of the population wont be able to tell the difference.

It's only a matter of time before vocalists are unnecessary (Vocaloid tried this but they abandoned it due to lack of money) and literally every piece of sought after vintage gear is perfectly emulated on a computer.

Where do we go then? When we have literally every available tool we would ever want at our fingertips?

I don't think it's quite as dire as the original poster claims, but in a short amount of time it will be. Technology moves, as said earlier, extremely quickly.

I feel like there is plenty of room right now and even after we cross over the uncanny valley of sound for musicians to impress the listener with mysterious technology. The problem is since so many pre-made tools are out there, less people will try to push themselves to create something truly original. It will take a shift in consciousness to make this happen. Already i see this retro-fetishism/hauntology/bedroom hiphop production style as a shift in consciousness, designed to remove people from the sterile nature of advanced music technology, but ironically it's using that same technology to mimic old technology of the past.

CGI for a while was scoffed as being 'too shiny' or just plain fake looking and stuck out like a sore thumb, in the last 3-4 years CGI technology and artistry has reached a point where they can easily trick someone into thinking they aren't seeing CGI. The only reason so much shitty cgi appears in movies still is because of the 'moving train' of limited time frame before a release.

CGI technology made a lot of people lazy and uncreative for quite a while, but now it's reached a turning point where i think even some of the most skeptical people against CGI can't help but see just how effective it can be. PRetty much anything in the visual realm is possible now, and creative people all over the world are harnessing that.

We haven't seen a technological 'breakthrough' in that same way with music since DAW computers and music making software became so advanced and affordable, which started around the late 90s.

By my estimates we're about 4-5 years away from a huge musical technology revolution, hopefully sooner. Look up the Yamaha VL-1 synthesizer for an example of what i'm talking about. If that technology took off, we'd be in a completely different musical landscape right now. Instead people aren't done jerking off yet about 70s synthesizers and trying to recreate them in digital. Once ALL of that is done to death, we'll move onto the future.

theres a thread like this in the autechre subforum, have a look at that ;-)

technology matters to a limited extent. otherwise we'd all be using kazoos and lighting our farts and calling it ELECTRO.

technology is not the answer to every creative issue. things have been getting better, thgouht people havent noticed. 2001 most music from this forum wasnt good, now there are more than 20 or 30 good people here imo, taking into account that not everybody has the same taste then you could say the number is higher again. the best thing is that the deleter boy/chengod attitude from 10 years ago has been thoroughly defeated and destroyed. the sad thing is that most people dont even recognise that things could have turned out a completely different way.

technologically, our little culture here is reaching the top of that, anyone on this forum can now go and get one nice synth if he has the patience to wait and save or whatever. so thats a good thing. no need to go backwards on that. perhaps theres other issues that need to be concentrated on, so that we have the best technology and can add other things in. think of aesthetics/morals/history/spirituality/enthusiasm/beauty/truth

We're reaching a point where everyone can get the same gadget from the same shop, so to make better music than others will require better ideas/talent/ or just plain better music hehe. The number 1 priority is to stop pretending that idm is a genre when it clearly is a lie. I bet aphex twin calls his next album IDM classics just to sabotage this community as revenge for his secrets getting out

  On 2/1/2013 at 10:19 AM, Squee said:

If IDM was the peak of creativity then I don't want to live anymore.

^this

But.. I do believe that there are certain genres (not music in general), that suffered from music technology advances.

Best example of this is DnB. Not every bodies cup of tea of course, but I don't think anyone can deny, that the stuff that was made in the 90's, is way superior to anything that's being made today.

On the contrary, there are also genres that have benefited from it, or completely new genres that has evolved because of new technologies/techniques. If I have to give a example of this, I would say the Future Garage stuff... that's all very exciting to me.

  On 2/1/2013 at 11:39 AM, Ceerial said:

 

  On 2/1/2013 at 10:19 AM, Squee said:

If IDM was the peak of creativity then I don't want to live anymore.

 

Best example of this is DnB. Not every bodies cup of tea of course, but I don't think anybody can deny, that the stuff that was made in the 90's, is way superior to anything that's being made today within the genre.

I kinda agree, but I don't think that is because of changes in technology, though. The style has just changed - and in this situation not for the better. At no point in history has something peaked and just stayed on that course. Things change, and thank God for that, and so does music. There's a reason why a lot of dnb these days sound like Noisia and Current Value just like there's a reason why rap sounds like... ehm... whatever rap sounds like these days. I mean, have a listen to some of Gil Scott-Heron's first material which is considered to be some of the first "rap" that was ever put on a record. Then turn on the radio and listen to Chris Brown rapping about bitches and dollars. Things change.

I think in some cases technology streamlines things for convenience but sacrifices on quality and subtleties that ultimately undermine the point of it. But in the long term, technology is a very good thing for creativity. Old traditions will be fussed over and idolized but in the long term we must continue to drive towards that unknown horizon. Producers just need to be careful that they don't get swallowed up in the trends and hype they find along the way. Always need to keep the focus on within your mobile and use the tools given in the way that best represents what you want to see unfold.

Regarding DnB... I think sampling is reason of the decline of this particular genre. Gifted producers that has choose to go in more sound design direction, rather than sampling (Photek, Amon Tobin and Squarepusher for example) has turned out to be worse musicians of because of it. I do have a suspicion that some musicians gets more lazy, with the more gear they get. Having a big studio, and lots of gear, doens't automatically make you a better musician.

(Just my opinion of course)

Some of my favorite new artist in recent years, like Burial and Oneohtrix Point Never are known to use limited number of equipment, in their music production. I think this sometimes helps with the overall quality of song, because the focus is more on the overall sound, rather than the sometimes unnecessary polishing of a song.

  On 2/1/2013 at 12:12 PM, Squee said:

 

  On 2/1/2013 at 11:39 AM, Ceerial said:

 

  On 2/1/2013 at 10:19 AM, Squee said:

If IDM was the peak of creativity then I don't want to live anymore.

 

Best example of this is DnB. Not every bodies cup of tea of course, but I don't think anybody can deny, that the stuff that was made in the 90's, is way superior to anything that's being made today within the genre.

 

I kinda agree, but I don't think that is because of changes in technology, though. The style has just changed - and in this situation not for the better. At no point in history has something peaked and just stayed on that course. Things change, and thank God for that, and so does music. There's a reason why a lot of dnb these days sound like Noisia and Current Value just like there's a reason why rap sounds like... ehm... whatever rap sounds like these days. I mean, have a listen to some of Gil Scott-Heron's first material which is considered to be some of the first "rap" that was ever put on a record. Then turn on the radio and listen to Chris Brown rapping about bitches and dollars. Things change.

Yeah.. I'm not sure the technology is the reason either. It might just be a question of sound evovlving (for better or worse).

I don't think technology stifles creativity at all, laziness does... technology is just a set of tools. People are still capable of the full range of their creativity, but they're also capable of just letting the tool do a lot of the work without much creative input from themselves. It's up to the person. I have a sampler; it came with a bunch of loops. I can use those (lazy) or I can record my own loops, work on the wavs, make a bunch of patterns myself, and get creative. The technology doesn't care how I do it, but I'd be fooling myself if I said "this sampler has stifled my creativity."

  On 2/1/2013 at 2:16 PM, luke viia said:

I don't think technology stifles creativity at all, laziness does... technology is just a set of tools. People are still capable of the full range of their creativity, but they're also capable of just letting the tool do a lot of the work without much creative input from themselves. It's up to the person. I have a sampler; it came with a bunch of loops. I can use those (lazy) or I can record my own loops, work on the wavs, make a bunch of patterns myself, and get creative. The technology doesn't care how I do it, but I'd be fooling myself if I said "this sampler has stifled my creativity."

/thread

  On 2/1/2013 at 2:25 PM, Squee said:

 

  On 2/1/2013 at 2:16 PM, luke viia said:

I don't think technology stifles creativity at all, laziness does... technology is just a set of tools. People are still capable of the full range of their creativity, but they're also capable of just letting the tool do a lot of the work without much creative input from themselves. It's up to the person. I have a sampler; it came with a bunch of loops. I can use those (lazy) or I can record my own loops, work on the wavs, make a bunch of patterns myself, and get creative. The technology doesn't care how I do it, but I'd be fooling myself if I said "this sampler has stifled my creativity."

 

/thread

/thread indeed

I think theres a feeling that there's a lot more mediocre stuff out there than in the 90s, but I think thats simply the internet making us much more aware of everything.

  On 2/1/2013 at 2:27 PM, compson said:

I think theres a feeling that there's a lot more mediocre stuff out there than in the 90s, but I think thats simply the internet making us much more aware of everything.

True.

It's like saying that the video production in the 80s was better than in the 00s, because of the huge amount of content that appeared on YouTube.

On a sidenote...

I hate it when people doubt technology and the future it will bring us.

"OMG, EVERYTHING WILL BE WAY WORSE NOW!"

No, you just have to adapt and realise that you can't put technological advancement on hold - and why would you? Get with the times, hippie!

I feel like what I wrote came of a little wrong.

I completely agree with Luke. There is absolutely no way technology is killling creativity. If anything, it's only going to help, and make it easier for more people to express their creativity. It can however be a distraction... for some.

And anyone that thinks there isn't music being released today, worth listening to. Should really get their heads out of their asses.

Wow, so many good points I can't even think of anything to contribute. I kinda feel like the existence of trap music is somehow relevant. Fuck, I already fell like I derailed the thread...

I think this article (it's from early last year but I just read it a couple days ago) regarding the state of dance genres and producers new ways of creating electronic music is somewhat relevant, especially the bit about Mark Fell of SND.

  On 2/1/2013 at 2:27 PM, compson said:

 

  On 2/1/2013 at 2:25 PM, Squee said:

 

  On 2/1/2013 at 2:16 PM, luke viia said:

I don't think technology stifles creativity at all, laziness does... technology is just a set of tools. People are still capable of the full range of their creativity, but they're also capable of just letting the tool do a lot of the work without much creative input from themselves. It's up to the person. I have a sampler; it came with a bunch of loops. I can use those (lazy) or I can record my own loops, work on the wavs, make a bunch of patterns myself, and get creative. The technology doesn't care how I do it, but I'd be fooling myself if I said "this sampler has stifled my creativity."

 

/thread

 

/thread indeed

 

I think theres a feeling that there's a lot more mediocre stuff out there than in the 90s, but I think thats simply the internet making us much more aware of everything.

That and the fact that literally anyone who owns a computer can record, mix and share music. In the 90's you'd need a lot of money just to record and mix, not to mention share. It was a shit filter. Now the shit filter is gone.

I think the problem was articulated perfectly by Drew Daniel from Matmos.

He points out that with gear and technology there is always an easy workflow, and so often people take the bait. So instead of dreaming up music and then using the technology as a way of realizing that music, people tend to just make the music that is easiest to make with the technology.

In addition to lazy music, this also accounts for a large portion of 'sameness' as well.

yeah thats pretty accurate i'd say. I think it was Gregory Taylor, a Cycling 74 programmer who said that when he used to repair DX7s back in the early 80s, literally 95% of the units he worked on had the exact same presets that came from the factory. Even though the synth was very powerful, it was a challenge and took almost guts to try and make your own sound. It was easier for bands to just work with what came on the synth.

  On 2/1/2013 at 7:13 AM, zemudene said:

Maybe I`m saying so because I`m kind of oldish but that`s what most this EDM stuff to me sounds like, like it`s made by computers using the same algorithms. So what do you think, can you relate to that? Do I have a point? Is technology making our minds too lazy and thus killing creativity and originality?

I'd put forward the idea that no, technology isn't making people lazy and uncreative. I'd say those people would be lazy and uncreative regardless of the tools. The thing is, with the technology available now, the likelihood of those, let's say, musically primitive, people making music that's worth listening to is becoming vanishingly small, precisely because the technology is so much more capable of realising those people's ideas and ambitions (which, for the most part, involve copying what's gone before with the least amount of effort).

Much great music has come about as a result of people trying to recreate the music they love and failing, but in the process, pretty much by accident, coming up with something new. It's the accidents and failures that open the doors and put you on the first step towards having a musical identity. You could say that House music came about like this, or Hip-Hop, and then those musics coalesced and became genres of their own to be mutated further down the line.

The challenge to overcome for each of us, in this case, is to admit that we might not be the next undiscovered musical genius who must have every tool in the box to succeed, and that a stripped-down approach might be beneficial. Especially difficult when you consider the strange paradox that the "state-of-the-art" is actually the cheapest option, and the "primitive" tools often the most expensive. As a result, "lo-fi/retro" is now seen as some kind of contrivance, or hipster indulgence, which is kind of sad.

  On 2/1/2013 at 7:36 AM, zemudene said:

And the biggest thing in electronic music in last years has been Burial who made his style by using simplest of tools- just a wave editor, not some magic technology available only to him.

You can tell in his tracks that he's intended to create something quite specific, but failed in the best possible way. And now he has a whole genre (or arguably, sub-genre) to call his own. All that from cutting and pasting in Sound Forge! He's said himself, if he used the tools everyone else uses, he'd probably make shit records.

I wonder, if you were to take 100 (at least slightly musically attuned) people, and task them with creating an "Autechre" track using only a recorder, bongo, mic, Casio SK5 and a Portastudio, would the majority of the music made be more interesting than if those people had used a computer to do the same thing? It probably wouldn't sound as much like Autechre, but would that be a bad thing?

i still don't believe makes that stuff in sound forge, the swings just sound too template-ish like the swings on an mpc or other common DAWS. Not that i don't think it's possible, its just that his music sounds too characteristically made on a midi sequencer program. If he did it all by chopping up wave files id like to think it would sound al ot more unique rhythm wise.