okay...what of the common man?

Posted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 10:41 pm

here is a very legitimate question: When put in the face of the common man, without the ears, the knowledge, the music theory, the hi tech equipment....and they "feel" ....I mean..."FEEL" the music...where does all the technical analysis go? What does it matter when music is a language of the soul? I think there is a boundary....a line where the technical trades with the essentiall...the soul. Talk to me here please!!! Yes, I completely recognize the vehicle of the technical to reach the ears...but at some point the technical is lost on the deeper, intuitive and infinitely more intelligent senses of the heart. YES?

I have many many friends that have listened to my song and NONE of them have expressed the musical theory complications and changing modality difficulties of my piece. Novices, yes. Ignorant of both digital sound and music theory, yes. but infinitely in tune, maybe more than you and I...to the nuances of musical emotion, NO.

I myself have many years of writing and a fair amount of experience with the technical. No, my mix and my music is not masterful...technically. But in spite of dissonance and imperfect recording and mixing...I know my music speaks emotionally. And I will be in the front of the line in criticizing the expression....leaving room for improvement.

But to write it off as amateur, novice or hugely lacking...NO. where do we draw the line? and how many of us recognize, openly , the value of RAW. the beauty and warmth that is found in the atonal, imperfections of spontaneous expresson?

Posted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 11:02 pm

Bovellum, in a different thread, wrote:

Quote:

I can take harsh criticism, that is why I came here.

You didn't mean that, did you? Confused

Quote:

I have many many friends that have listened to my song and NONE of them have expressed the musical theory complications and changing modality difficulties of my piece.

Yes, you are correct, the 'common man' does not critically listen to things that are in (or out) of phase, and understand what he hears.
The common man (or, friend) tells you everything's great because he thinks that that's what you want to hear, because he doesn't want to upset the only guy he knows who might possibly 'make it out of this place'.

He also takes it for a grain of salt when he hears things out of phase played (unbeknownst to him) in mono, which cause important things like vocals and percussion to totally disappear from the mix.

There's nothing 'raw' about phase cancellation, or dissonance, or strange sibilant artifacts in the higher frequency on vocal tracks.

You have talent in the songwriting category, that doesn't necessarily mean that you have it in the 'tech' category.
(Conversely, I can't write a song to save my life...) Rolling Eyes

Posted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 11:07 pm

I love it. I think I found a new forum home. Im laughing and thank you for your response.

I do think...no, I KNOW, that so many people dont hear that kind of stuff...or...if they do..they hear thru it. GRANTED...if they know it is an "amateur" recording..Do you catch what Im suggesting? Its like this switch goes off, that turns off the "commercial" evaluation and it tunes into the heart of the expression.

But thank you so much for the songwriting statement. That does help to confirm my passion somewhat...in the midst of the obvious giants of this forum.

Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2007 12:16 am

bent wrote:

Bovellum, in a different thread, wrote:

Quote:

I can take harsh criticism, that is why I came here.

You didn't mean that, did you? Confused

Quote:

I have many many friends that have listened to my song and NONE of them have expressed the musical theory complications and changing modality difficulties of my piece.

Yes, you are correct, the 'common man' does not critically listen to things that are in (or out) of phase, and understand what he hears.
The common man (or, friend) tells you everything's great because he thinks that that's what you want to hear, because he doesn't want to upset the only guy he knows who might possibly 'make it out of this place'.

He also takes it for a grain of salt when he hears things out of phase played (unbeknownst to him) in mono, which cause important things like vocals and percussion to totally disappear from the mix.

There's nothing 'raw' about phase cancellation, or dissonance, or strange sibilant artifacts in the higher frequency on vocal tracks.

You have talent in the songwriting category, that doesn't necessarily mean that you have it in the 'tech' category.
(Conversely, I can't write a song to save my life...) Rolling Eyes

YES YES YES!!! I TOTALLY meant that!!! Test me on it!! pick it apart, tear it up. Its not about ME. I am, as you are, a vehicle of something higher. The only criticism is in my commitment to learning and my yielding to that creative, transformative force...

Some will certainly laugh at this. I laugh with you. It is humorous indeed...an indescribable experience of wonder and amusement indeed...whether ANY of us get it or not.

Fire away

Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2007 12:41 am

OK...

BUMP.

Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2007 12:47 am

i hope im getting this right. but yes, i kinda wish i was the common man where i could just FEEL the music rather than just pick it apart and figure out how they did it, what they used, etc. i wish i could get lost again in the music like i used to before i started getting into recording. but i think this is where the technical side kind of comes in. this technical side of things helps us (engineers/producers) convey this emotion for those who havent been tainted by the technical side of things. we are the ones that help share the emotions of bands, artists, etc. to those who cant go to their shows and feel it there. so yes, when people are listening to these songs the technical is overshadowed by the emotional eventhough it is almost equally important as the emotional.

but thats just me, and i hope thats what you meant. if not...im dumb.

Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2007 12:53 am

bent wrote:

OK...

BUMP.

..I can see thru and tell the difference between genuine constructive , helpful and developmental criticism and immature, egotistical meanness.

Ill know the difference.

Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2007 1:03 am

TheBear wrote:

i hope im getting this right. but yes, i kinda wish i was the common man where i could just FEEL the music rather than just pick it apart and figure out how they did it, what they used, etc. i wish i could get lost again in the music like i used to before i started getting into recording. but i think this is where the technical side kind of comes in. this technical side of things helps us (engineers/producers) convey this emotion for those who havent been tainted by the technical side of things. we are the ones that help share the emotions of bands, artists, etc. to those who cant go to their shows and feel it there. so yes, when people are listening to these songs the technical is overshadowed by the emotional eventhough it is almost equally important as the emotional.

but thats just me, and i hope thats what you meant. if not...im dumb.

Yeah, I agree...however novice I may be...Im still way more sensitive to the complexities of music and technicalities than most people. And it is hard to let go of that sometimes ...the filters are so thick and the senses clouded. I often wish I could go back too... But I would rather err on the side of ignorance...and let someone else communicate my music, as you said, more accurately and technically. (money barrier)

Childhood held such magic and wondrous possibilities. I wish there was a switch that we could flip between the modes of ignorance and bliss - and the perspective of broad, technical and wise awareness. Fortunately, I still fall on the dumbass side. Very Happy

Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2007 1:10 am

haha dont we all fall on the dumbass side. but yes, its all such a loaded question where you cant fully side with one idea or the other. cuz there is so much more, which i find so intriguing. maybe thats the reason lots of times drugs come into play with music so you can turn that switch on/off Wink

but who knows...im not gunna say.

Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2007 1:11 am

TheBear wrote:

haha dont we all fall on the dumbass side. but yes, its all such a loaded question where you cant fully side with one idea or the other. cuz there is so much more, which i find so intriguing. maybe thats the reason lots of times drugs come into play with music so you can turn that switch on/off Wink

but who knows...im not gunna say.

LOL!! Well said...or not said, lol. Im so with you on this. What a dillema. Notice my choice of word - "filter"...

Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2007 1:18 am

I am not quite clear on what you're getting at?

I don't play any instruments anymore but I still play the console and recorders and processors.

I have the very best equipment and I've used the very worst equipment. I still get lovely recordings either way because making good recordings really don't have much to do with the equipment. Sure, the better the equipment the better your recording might sound but only might. If you have lousy musical technique and produce a lousy sound with your instrument, I don't think anybody cares about the content if it sounds like crap, regardless of the technical blah blah. People won't want to listen to it that way. There must be some modicum of professionalism, in your recording, for people to accept your talent. It's a whole package deal.

Whole package girl
Ms. Remy Ann David

Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2007 1:26 am

Lol, thats exactly what were saying...sorta...

no doubt, when doing the technical, a sort of pause has to be put on the emotional...or at best, it needs to be very very carefully fused....wow..an art in itself.

and when doing the emotional...the technical must be suspended....or delicately controlled as to not interfere with the divine.

Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2007 1:29 am

exactly. that where the technical side comes in to the whole emotion aspect. us as engineers blah blahblah, we also have to have the ability to convey emotion with our technical "expertise" if we dont have an ear for these things, we're doomed from the start. which goes along with what remy says, you can make a good recording with amazing equipment or shitty equipment, you just gotta know what ur doing, which goes along with the emotional side AND technical side.

technical conveys emotional but technical is overshadowed by the emotional by the common man yada yada yada

Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2007 6:15 am

Okay...I'll bite since I was the one that trashed the compositional aspect of your song.

I'll happily say that I am quite capable of sitting back and listening to music for the sake of music as well as flipping the switch and then listening via technical ears.

And listening to the previously posted song, even with my musical (non-technical) ears, something felt off with the strings. Even my wife (a classical clarinetist and VERY non-technical person), gave my computer a strange look at the entrance of the strings declaring them odd sounding and way out of tune (referring back to the odd mode used in place of Major or minor.)

We can say that this can be chalked up to once again, a musically inclined person evaluating the piece, but I have to argue this.

If Mozart or Beethoven had written pieces which were as dissettling, would they be known today? I would say "no."

The general public decided on their popularity, not music critics or musicians themselves. Therefore, I think that the common man here is getting the shaft and being blamed for ignorance which he does not possess.

Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2007 6:17 am

I would add that I bet if you replaced the strings with better samples or live players playing notes that made sense, your friends would sit up and take notice and compliment you on the vast improvement of the piece - even if they're not able to tell you what changed.

This topic sponsored by: