Linked by Eugenia Loli on Tue 7th Sep 2010 10:25 UTC
Multimedia, AV Every so often we publish here at OSNews articles about copyright, about the war of the "old media" establishment against everyone else. Many, myself included, have argued that the way to get out of this mess -- short of changing the law -- is to have more artists release their work under a Creative Commons license. However, after a few years it became obvious to me that CC would never be able to change the industry all by itself. Offering a Free license, and having 30,000 albums released under it, was still not enough. Until the Summer of 2009, that is. Update: Added audio samples.
Thread beginning with comment 439665
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Computer generated music
by Laurence on Tue 7th Sep 2010 13:35 UTC in reply to "RE: Computer generated music"
Member since:

I don't mean to sound rude, but you really don't know what you're talking about.

Electronic music isn't about trying to accurately synth real instruments. If a artist needs a real guitar then they'll bring in a session guitarist to record. The point of electronic music is that it doesn't sound like a traditional pub band or classical orchestra. If you want that kind of music, then listen to any one of the millions of bands struggling to make a name or any number of up and coming musicians that play free performances at your local church / cathedral or town fate. There's plenty of quality music out there that's not electronic music and is also free to attend.

Now lets address my issues with your article:

While software to synthesize music has existed for many years, either its actual audio and production quality was low, or the created music had little musical value. Techno and trance music for example had remained a Euro-thing mostly, and never took off with most music critics. Besides, techno/trance was also very commercial in nature from the get go.

Yes, Scooter and Ian Van Dahl are pop, but that's not to say that techno and trance are commercial. Quite the opposite in fact.
And more over, being a DJ and producer of (and for want a better term) "underground" dance music, I can safely say there is a lot of highly advanced production going into techno and trance. Take Speedy J for example - his stuff dwarfs anything played on the radio. Sure, his sound wont be to everyones taste, but that only goes to further prove my previous point about dance music not being a commercial sound.

You also talk about dance as if it's just your new fangled genre and techno and trance. It really isn't. Theres, breaks, DnB, electro, house, hardhouse, hardcore and about a million varieties of music within each of those. Theres IDM which gives you the likes of Aphex Twin and Squarepusher. Again, anything but commercial yet hugely technical music. In fact Thom Yorke credits Squarepusher and Aphex Twin as two of his influences in Radioheads sound post OK Computer. These artists also pioneered many of the sounds used commonly in music these days (such as the digital glitching effect)

Chillwave on the other hand is different. It's a new genre, with a nostalgic, somewhat sad sound. It's grass roots, sprouting after audio software has matured in the recent years. Nothing like this existed before, and so the music blogs took notice! Within a few months they hailed chillwave as the next big thing in music.

Having been an audiophile for a great many years, it's very very rare that I hear a "new" genre. Usually it's just taking an old sound and modernising it a little. Unfortunately I can't view the clips you loaded (I assume they were clips) as the embedded pages in your article are blocked at work. However I am highly skeptical that you're new discovery isn't just a re-branding of an existing genre as happens on a regular basis within dance music. I'm interested to hear what this brings to the table that isn't already done by any of these 10+ years ago (suggested bands in brackets):
* IDM (Boards of Canada, Royksopp),
* Trip-Hop (Portishead),
* Chillout / Leftfield (The Orb, Leftfield)
* Brokenbeat (not really to familiar with the artists in this genre)
* EBM (Front 242, Nitzer Ebb)
* Electronica (Love and Rockets later stuff, Radiohead's Kid A and Amnesia)
* Electro (Kraftwork)
* or more recently, Dubstep.

I get sick and tired about hearing people passing comment about a massive scene of music when they clearly have little exposure to the music.


Edited 2010-09-07 13:47 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 6

Tuishimi Member since:

You have an invalid tag in your post. You never opened the <rant> before you closed it. That is NOT good form. You can try this :

...before you post next time.

(ha ha!)

Reply Parent Score: 2

Eugenia Member since:

>Electronic music isn't about trying to accurately synth real instruments.

I never said it is, so I don't like how you started your comment about myself "not having a clue".

The problem is that chillwave is supposed to be more natural and more blending-in music, and so they need to add filters to hide the very "clear" sound of electronic-generated music. That's what I meant, not that other electronic types of music need to do so too.

As for the rest of your rant, I can assure you that I'm familiar with electronic music. I'm European anyway, and electronic was huge in the '90s, when I was younger (my brother was a DJ too at the time). The problem with it is that most of it sounds robotic. And when it doesn't sound robotic, it's because it's masqueraded pop. Therefore, after about 35 years, true electronic music is still considered largely underground music. Sure, there's Moby and Zero7, and any of these dream-sounding electronic artists, but again, their music while somewhat ambient, it fails to do what chillwave does: unearth memories.

Chillwave instead is all about emotion and memories. The fact that it's electronic too is besides the point, rather than shouting it from the rooftops as other electronic music does with its compositions. And everyone else agrees that chillwave it's is own genre btw (granted, created out of 4-5 different genres from the '80s, but that's the fashion that every other genre is created).

Edited 2010-09-07 18:43 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

Laurence Member since:

Ok, I've listened to the samples now and most of them just sounded like bog standard chillout / IDM tracks.

Reminds me a lot of these albums from the last 15 years:
* Royksopp - 'Melody AM'
* Lemon Jelly - 'Lost Horizons'
* Amon Tobin - 'Out From Out Where'
* Love and Rockets - 'Blandat'
* Boards of Canada - 'Geogaddi' and 'The Campfire Headphase' (though personally I think their best album is 'Music Has the Right to Children', but that album is more "electronic chillout" and has less of the organic sounds you describe)

I listen to this kind of stuff a lot and I can tell you now that it's neither new nor "underground". Royksopp and Lemon Jelly have both had UK top 40 singles back in the early part of 00s and Amon Tobin is sampled to hell for TV backing music (BBCs Top Gear being just one example).

I really do hate genre pidgenholes as they always seem to detract people from the music. Most of the time it seems they're born out of a need to promote the artists rather than music, and this seems little different.

Edited 2010-09-07 22:10 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3