DMusic.com | for indie musicians and fans | Free MP3 music downloads - Forums: Complaints: Some artists could use some production.....

Forums > Help: Complaints

Some artists could use some production.....

Elu	Date: January 3, 2003 @ 5:54 AM Ok...here it goes...I don't want to piss anyone off here. This is not the intent. I've been a member for a very short time and I have listened to a few artists music here at dmusic. Many of you have a decent structure but so many of you lack production. The sounds, the vocals the arrangements and the mix. If music is just a hobby that's one thing, but if any of the artists on this site want to get their stuff out there it has to be a little more commerical in quality. We are all competing with the majors here.....Don't let any of the A&R people tell you any different. Many of them say it doesn't matter what the quality is like if it is a solid idea. From experience, I know that A&R people don't know their Ass from a hole in the ground. A&R people always pick artists who have already passed milestones and are generating some interest on their own. That's when they jump in and say..."hey...I think you have what it takes". Well no $h!t. So, the point being that artists need to spend the extra time learning how to make their material more appealing to the listeners. Ok, I'm ready for the beating!...bring it on....no blunt objects please.
milladrive	Date: January 3, 2003 @ 6:15 AM /me puts brass knuckles back in pocket. hehe All it takes is money, bro. We can do only what we can with what we have. It's pretty well known that A&R people are not always as musically oriented as we'd like. As an independent, I'd really like to try to not rely on them so much. Another point is that the requisites for each person's goals can be very different. For instance, as a songwriter and not very much a performer, production isn't nearly as important as it'd be were the person an aspiring performer with a particular sound that needs to be carried out. For the songwriter, the production isn't his or her business. They write the song; I think it's up to the artist to create the style.
Elu	Date: January 3, 2003 @ 6:40 AM " id="29543">brass knuckles...ouch...thanks for putting those away. So how,in your opinion, would a songwriter ever hope to get their music out there and generate some serious interest? I understand that many "writers" want to sell or get someone to record and perform it professionally. But!...BIG BUT! although the artist needs to create their own "style"..it still has to sound good...it still has to be appealing. And not just to their mothers. !ouch!... Production is not related to a particular sound. It is related to the quality, no matter what the style. The artist definately should be involved with expressing the intent, but so many need help in the form of production.
Wordsense	Date: January 3, 2003 @ 7:07 AM i feel as if my production is sufficient for the time being. still needs a lil polish and shine, but i'm very satisfied with my creations.
milladrive	Date: January 3, 2003 @ 7:13 AM "...although the artist needs to create their own "style"..it still has to sound good...it still has to be appealing. And not just to their mothers." ...Imo, a composition needs to sound good only to the artist who wants to perform it. This is why composition copyrights are different from sound recording copyrights. Once an artist put their own spin on a song, the recording now has the flavor of the production that the artist wanted to put on it. As an artist (not an A&R person), I think one should be able to hear past all the production in the world to see a good song. If the song is demo'ed with nothing more than mumble and a tapping foot, how can someone say it's not a good song? Because it isn't produced properly? Please. "Production is not related to a particular sound. It is related to the quality, no matter what the style." ....I've never disagreed more with a statement in my whole life. I think production is the _only_ thing that creates a sound or style. Not a writing style, but a performing style. Production is what _makes_ a song sound like it does. How many different ways can we hear "Over The Rainbow" performed by how many different artists before my point's been made here? Still the same composition. Like I say, I think we do the best we can with what we have, and unless we're spending a lotta money on studio time, we can all use improvement in our production. ;)" id="29545">And rightfully so, WS. You do some good work, and should be proud. "So how,in your opinion, would a songwriter ever hope to get their music out there and generate some serious interest?" ...I dunno about the latter, but the former is evident all over this site, and at sites like this. "...although the artist needs to create their own "style"..it still has to sound good...it still has to be appealing. And not just to their mothers." ...Imo, a composition needs to sound good only to the artist who wants to perform it. This is why composition copyrights are different from sound recording copyrights. Once an artist put their own spin on a song, the recording now has the flavor of the production that the artist wanted to put on it. As an artist (not an A&R person), I think one should be able to hear past all the production in the world to see a good song. If the song is demo'ed with nothing more than mumble and a tapping foot, how can someone say it's not a good song? Because it isn't produced properly? Please. "Production is not related to a particular sound. It is related to the quality, no matter what the style." ....I've never disagreed more with a statement in my whole life. I think production is the _only_ thing that creates a sound or style. Not a writing style, but a performing style. Production is what _makes_ a song sound like it does. How many different ways can we hear "Over The Rainbow" performed by how many different artists before my point's been made here? Still the same composition. Like I say, I think we do the best we can with what we have, and unless we're spending a lotta money on studio time, we can all use improvement in our production.
Svensta	Date: January 3, 2003 @ 7:59 AM I know you have some form of contract or registration with the music industry and DEFINITELY (from listening to you) have some access or means to truly professional recording equipment. The fact Milla pointedly (and correctly, imo) makes is that 95% of the artists here don't HAVE that same access level. Moreso, this site flies in CONVENTION of such things, in my mind. Where else can you go to find truly homemade, handcrafted music? Music untouched by business-minded promoters and marketting directors? Music created simply for the joy of creation with no real agenda other than that? Most artists here don't have illusions of becoming a star the magnitude of say The Beatles, or even moderate "star success" They come here because they have music burning inside them, and they want so much to release it, to GIFT us with it. I can forgive a lot of production loss, to sample music that is unique to the creator and full of the passion that brought them here, song in hand. Granted, the polish of professional recording and mastering will enhance their audience numbers, but its more important that they take this, the first step, and create music and give it to the world. This is SO much more important than pops and hisses, to me." id="29548">This entire thing sounds a little down-the-nose to the people you are writing to, Elu. Granted I am a fan of your music, and have done some promotion for you here (mentioning you to people), but this just sounds more like a "my stuff is polished and gorgeous (which it is) so what's wrong with YOUR stuff" I know you have some form of contract or registration with the music industry and DEFINITELY (from listening to you) have some access or means to truly professional recording equipment. The fact Milla pointedly (and correctly, imo) makes is that 95% of the artists here don't HAVE that same access level. Moreso, this site flies in CONVENTION of such things, in my mind. Where else can you go to find truly homemade, handcrafted music? Music untouched by business-minded promoters and marketting directors? Music created simply for the joy of creation with no real agenda other than that? Most artists here don't have illusions of becoming a star the magnitude of say The Beatles, or even moderate "star success" They come here because they have music burning inside them, and they want so much to release it, to GIFT us with it. I can forgive a lot of production loss, to sample music that is unique to the creator and full of the passion that brought them here, song in hand. Granted, the polish of professional recording and mastering will enhance their audience numbers, but its more important that they take this, the first step, and create music and give it to the world. This is SO much more important than pops and hisses, to me.
milladrive	Date: January 3, 2003 @ 8:27 AM I'd like to agree, Sven, but... hehe, I'm =p Actually, I'd like to take those last two paragraphs and frame them. That third paragraph in particular almost brought a tear to my eye.
SoulBeats	Date: January 3, 2003 @ 1:01 PM Yep. You said it. :buhuu!:
azhazhellfire	Date: January 3, 2003 @ 11:22 AM this is a DECENT thread.
leflaw	Date: January 3, 2003 @ 1:08 PM My opinion..... there is no such thing as a demo. Never play anything for anybody that you don't consider finished. Use digital mastering software. easy and Cheap. check out T-racks software and wavelab by Steinberg.... I have played on a anumber of recording sessions, and I think this is kind of standard these days. Demos were from the 50's and 60's. Now, with everybody having a home studio, there is no excuse for shitty mixes.
Jennae	Date: January 3, 2003 @ 1:11 PM Well I can personally say that my PRODUCTION so to speak sucks! And I know it. Am I learning everything I do musically alone and without help? Or bandmates? YES Am I creating music for the love of music? YES Am I certain that many others here have enjoyed my music here on dmusic although it lacks professionalism? YES Do I think I will ever be rich and famous from singing pop songs in a brittney spears outfit? NO Do I give a rats ass about A&R and if they rate my music or their opinions? No if they say I suck will I cease to exist and give up my musical talents? No Do I play for keeps? Yes Do I play for me? YEs Do I enjoy sharing, collaborating, discussing and listening to music with other fellow dmusicians? Yes It's not all about show....... It's not all about going somewhere... trying to be someone.... I guess mainly for me..... It's about who I am... and my love for music. so I guess that whether or not we take your advice we must first realize if we need it.
mcarp555	Date: January 4, 2003 @ 9:50 AM Garageband.com, and it's important to keep the song at the head of the list of things to consider. With playing second, then production. I do disagree with Leflaw however; yes it is easier than ever before to make polished demos, but all the software in the world won't make you a better musician. If I'm going to spend time and money to make myself sing like Bono, play guitar like Clapton, and piano like Elton, maybe I should just invest in learning to play better in the first place. If I do a crappy demo (and Lord knows I have), it's to get the idea of the song across. Yeah, I could do it better with more equipment, but so what? So every time I get a new gizmo, I redo the song again? When would it stop? I know what my faults are musically. When you put your stuff out in public, you can't hide 'em. Hopefully someone one else hears the other things I hear in my work. What I hear in Milla & Jennae's work, rough tho it may be. That thing that people who confuse the SONG with the RECORDING don't hear. " id="29579">I agree with Sven, it sounds very much like a look down the nose at most of us. I also agree with Milla, in that you can't keep a good song down. I've done a fair amount of rating over at Garageband.com, and it's important to keep the song at the head of the list of things to consider. With playing second, then production. I do disagree with Leflaw however; yes it is easier than ever before to make polished demos, but all the software in the world won't make you a better musician. If I'm going to spend time and money to make myself sing like Bono, play guitar like Clapton, and piano like Elton, maybe I should just invest in learning to play better in the first place. If I do a crappy demo (and Lord knows I have), it's to get the idea of the song across. Yeah, I could do it better with more equipment, but so what? So every time I get a new gizmo, I redo the song again? When would it stop? I know what my faults are musically. When you put your stuff out in public, you can't hide 'em. Hopefully someone one else hears the other things I hear in my work. What I hear in Milla & Jennae's work, rough tho it may be. That thing that people who confuse the SONG with the RECORDING don't hear.
milladrive	Date: January 4, 2003 @ 12:53 PM I tend to agree here with Sven, Jennae, mcarp. None of them has said anything in this thread that I would disagree with. ...Just thought I'd say that. I definitely do disagree with the bulk of leflaw's post, tho.
SoulBeats	Date: January 4, 2003 @ 4:03 PM I just make music cos I want to. I like it that people get to hear my music. I agree with Carp, Milla, Jenna & Sven totally.
victorsskull	Date: January 4, 2003 @ 8:07 PM all what I know is I have been #1 on alot of sites alot of times and my production is any thing but perfect. and every thing jennae said I agree with. cheers jennae! you said it perfectly=D
sinai	Date: January 5, 2003 @ 12:57 AM indeed, tha only important thing iz to be making music ur happy with, if it soundz like shit, it soundz like shit...if it floatz ur boat, who am i to sink it?
icisnizz	Date: January 5, 2003 @ 8:21 AM Some people such as myself like to hear music that is created by the creator, no matter what it sounds like. For example groups like 'The Shapshifters & Living Legends', have some of the worst mixdowns to date. Does this effect there sales. Hell no, they get sold out shows from Canada to Japan. Why is this? because they appeal to people such as myself that enjoy music that has that 'rough' edge. The edge that hasn't stepped foot in a overpriced-studio environment. I also listen to tons of punk bands that cant mix worth shit. Does that stop me or 1000's of others...no. It's music, no matter how much they pay to make it sound 'perfect'. Infact, I don't even enjoy hearing stuff that sounds like it's been studio-fied to the maximum. I love the 'hiss', and the sick days when you can tell artists wernt at their best the day they made, 'that song'. It's the blood and sweat poured in the music. If I was ever asked to re-record any of my songs, I would say 'never', because that's they way they were made. Once a song is made for me and many others, it's somewhat set in stone. To be in the mainstream your music has to appeal to a bunch of dumb-fucks who cant see past a 'hiss' or some feedback, to hear how god a song truly is. If there that dumb, I'd rather them listen to nelly and shit-ditty, and stay far away from so many of who lack production, because the mainstream lacks everything else.
icisnizz	Date: January 5, 2003 @ 8:28 AM btw, I wasn't pissed off when I wrote ^^, if it gives off that vibe. It's just a matter of who your appealing to, that's all. Sure, most of us need better equipment and even I myself have spent way to much money on mastering my last album, it was a waste of money. Everyone is learning, and will continue to do so if they choose. Some people here might have the worst sounding mics in the world, like there singing through a web cam mic or a speaker, but as long as I feel it, I'll listen. Most of us aren't here to sell things, but to share music. Were all aware that we need improvement.
Jennae	Date: January 5, 2003 @ 9:07 AM sometimes less is more.
Expose	Date: January 5, 2003 @ 6:35 PM I agree. Some of the production is good... but some of it is downright nasty. Yet people come here to get their music heard, so when they have fans that will be willing to buy their albums, THEN they will spend the moneyto make it sound good.
pog	Date: January 5, 2003 @ 10:52 PM I can sort of see what leflaw is saying here, guys... I've released stuff that I regretted, as I could have spent a little bit more time polishing it up (an art within itself)....fade this, e.q. that, add fx here, but I can also see the value of learning from past recordings, and hearing others constructive criticisms.
Alleagenz	Date: January 6, 2003 @ 11:04 AM Many artist produce to the best of their ability, if a tune sounds strange to yourself then its up to the discretion of the downloader or streamer to think to him/herself that the music lacks this and that, if you want the sound to sound like the radio then it will cost a lot of money to get a mini studio, anyway the only reason some trax are not up to scratch is because half the time its not what you expected to hear, commercialism is cheese, long live originality!!
Elu	Date: January 6, 2003 @ 1:03 PM YOWZA!...yeah baby! Ok first of all I want to say something to set the record straight. I do not and never have looked down noses at anyone. I have just recently started paying close attention to the production and sound of my music. I have been slammed by most A&R people and have heard so much BS it would make your head spin. My music used to suck...Honestly I don't think it does anymore. It was not the songs but the lack of production and quality and attention...maybe even the lack of thought and the hastyness to get it onto tape. I have not spent much on my equipment. I use only two pieces of equipment, an Akai S2000 and a roland sound canvas. Putting sounds together and being selective is what I am talking of here. I have two friends who record in LA. They are engineers and have passed some knowledge and brutal honesty onto me. They have recorded the likes of Micheal Jackson, Alanis Morrisette, etc.....Recently my music has been reviewed by many talented people such as Jewel, Steven Hewitt to name a few...Critisism is a part of the industry, indpendent or not. Take your songs to a friend and ask them what they think?...Good friends will not lie. Think about it, how is the production different in the two versions of Blue Monday or even Mrs Robinson. They both sound entirely different, but the production makes both enjoyable. Production means structure, layering, arrangement, sound quality is not necessarily a part of production. The Cult has some terrible recordings but they are still produced...as well as the Cure's first album recorded in Robert Smith's mom's kitchen. Again it is still well produced. Know what production is before you jump hateful into comments. This thread is honestly supposed to bring some needed attention to some un-noticed musicians. I would also like to add that my music is not perfect by any means. I constantly fight with it. I write one song at a time and spend countless hours finishing them and producing them which includes tearing them down and starting over on many an occasion. I work with what I get and have and make it as good as it can possibly sound. I spent two years on my Sensuality release (9) songs fighting many ugly things in life....but I did not compromize production. And lastly, There are a bunch of well produced, well known artists who have some terrible stuff. The truth be known that there is some good stuff here that could reach more ears if it sounded better.
Jennae	Date: January 6, 2003 @ 3:07 PM OMG! Did he just say Robert Smith! THE CURE!!?? Ok.....You just made my COOL list. I love THE CURE!! Yeah BABY!!!
milladrive	Date: January 6, 2003 @ 4:28 PM "I write one song at a time and spend countless hours finishing them..." ...I don't. Dude, not every song and/or recording calls for countless hours. Some can take years, some can be finished in 15 minutes. And, if I can't finish writng a particular song, does that mean I can't work on another while that one sits? Come on. I've got so many unfinished songs, it'd "make your head spin." There are many great songs and/or recordings that have been laboriously detailed, and there are many great songs/recordings that have been knocked off in, like I say, 15 minutes. Some of the greatest Beatles songs were not only written in less than satisfactory conditions, but many were written under a contract deadline. In fact, I know of at least one song that was recorded and released in a single day, then sold millions of copies. Obviously, it has very little to do with how painstaking the work was, or how much overkill we wanna put on a recording. "I work with what I get and have and make it as good as it can possibly sound." ...No different from anyone else. That's what we've been tryin' to tell ya all along. If you happen to put more emphasis on pristine production than do others, do ya feel others should be judged based on that? ..or are you one of those people who hears a less than professional production and stops listening? 'Cause if that's the case, it's your loss, no one else's. ..And if that's not the case, then wouldn't it be more idealistic to try changing the listeners rather than the artists? After all, the artists are already doin' what they can with what they have. My suggestion to people is that they pay _less_ attention to the production because it can often get in the way of them enjoying the song. Which reminds me, I point out one more time (and not hatefully, I might add), there is a BIG difference between a song and a recording. You refer to them as if they're synonymous. They're not." id="29710">Personally, Elu, I'd like to see you address a few of the responses in this thread directly. I mean, filibustering and self-aggrandizing are all well and good, but I think a few people have actually made valid points here. However, you've discredited most of them. Do you really think you're the only here one who knows what production is? I think this is the type of condescension that Sven and carpie alluded to. "This thread is honestly supposed to bring some needed attention to some un-noticed musicians." Such as? So far, I've seen ya call attention to yourself and some pretty big-name(dropped) artists, but what other artists are gonna get attention from this? "I write one song at a time and spend countless hours finishing them..." ...I don't. Dude, not every song and/or recording calls for countless hours. Some can take years, some can be finished in 15 minutes. And, if I can't finish writng a particular song, does that mean I can't work on another while that one sits? Come on. I've got so many unfinished songs, it'd "make your head spin." There are many great songs and/or recordings that have been laboriously detailed, and there are many great songs/recordings that have been knocked off in, like I say, 15 minutes. Some of the greatest Beatles songs were not only written in less than satisfactory conditions, but many were written under a contract deadline. In fact, I know of at least one song that was recorded and released in a single day, then sold millions of copies. Obviously, it has very little to do with how painstaking the work was, or how much overkill we wanna put on a recording. "I work with what I get and have and make it as good as it can possibly sound." ...No different from anyone else. That's what we've been tryin' to tell ya all along. If you happen to put more emphasis on pristine production than do others, do ya feel others should be judged based on that? ..or are you one of those people who hears a less than professional production and stops listening? 'Cause if that's the case, it's your loss, no one else's. ..And if that's not the case, then wouldn't it be more idealistic to try changing the listeners rather than the artists? After all, the artists are already doin' what they can with what they have. My suggestion to people is that they pay _less_ attention to the production because it can often get in the way of them enjoying the song. Which reminds me, I point out one more time (and not hatefully, I might add), there is a BIG difference between a song and a recording. You refer to them as if they're synonymous. They're not.
GrooveTonic	Date: January 6, 2003 @ 6:29 PM I think, however, that we can conclude that good (professional sounding) production of a recording makes a song sound better. Just because there is a shitty rendition of a song (poorly produced perhaps) that doesn't mean that the song itself is not very good. An artists production skills also doesn't necessarily reflect musical potential of an artist or song. Anyway, that's what I got from this thread (:. Remember, you have to define production before you start talking about it. In my definition there is a musical and non-musical (technical) component. The musical component is arrangement and determing how to layer the song and order it around (structural). A technical component is the equipment used and how to operate that equipment and understand the ins and outs of recording. " id="29715">Milla's got a good point... "there is a BIG difference between a song and a recording." Different people are referring to different things in this thread and it is a little bit confusing. I think, however, that we can conclude that good (professional sounding) production of a recording makes a song sound better. Just because there is a shitty rendition of a song (poorly produced perhaps) that doesn't mean that the song itself is not very good. An artists production skills also doesn't necessarily reflect musical potential of an artist or song. Anyway, that's what I got from this thread . Remember, you have to define production before you start talking about it. In my definition there is a musical and non-musical (technical) component. The musical component is arrangement and determing how to layer the song and order it around (structural). A technical component is the equipment used and how to operate that equipment and understand the ins and outs of recording.
pog	Date: January 6, 2003 @ 7:33 PM heh... My heads taught itself to filter through scratchy recordings... I don't even notice the diff between polished and unmixed anymore
pmscpc	Date: January 6, 2003 @ 8:13 PM Something mundane will pass as good if produced well enough. Something excellent may get overlooked if it's not polished enough. Sometimes I think Production, mastering and engineering have nothing whatsoever to do with music. "Unchained Melody" is quite a powerful ballad, but depending on which of the many many versions you are listening to, you might think it's average.... until you heard the Righteous Brothers version.... well, that's my bias eeking out at any rate. BUT, and it is a big BUTT (arse jokes next), there's nothing wrong with getting better at something. Wether you have a tape recorder or a digital zillion track hard disk, microphone placement will affect the sound regardless. As will the selection of sounds you use from a tone box/sound font or whatever module you have. Sometimes the natural compression of tape will sound "better" (or so your ears may tell you) than going straight to disk. And so it goes on and on until one day we realise we forgot to write a bunch of good songs (for good read - headbanging, gentle, melodic or whatever it is you're into). I am enjoying what I hear on dmusic - I think it's pretty much accepted that Brian Eno won't be producing any of us on these places......but on the whole it's better than a lot of places I can think of. :) Where are the instructions for these forums ? I want cool emoticons like all the kids :eek:" id="29721">I have some Django Reinhardt on Vinyl that was probably captured on WAX DISK first. I have some George Benson & Earl Klugh digitally recorded. I get a hod load more enjoyment out of Django than George (but "On Broadway" is fabulous). Something mundane will pass as good if produced well enough. Something excellent may get overlooked if it's not polished enough. Sometimes I think Production, mastering and engineering have nothing whatsoever to do with music. "Unchained Melody" is quite a powerful ballad, but depending on which of the many many versions you are listening to, you might think it's average.... until you heard the Righteous Brothers version.... well, that's my bias eeking out at any rate. BUT, and it is a big BUTT (arse jokes next), there's nothing wrong with getting better at something. Wether you have a tape recorder or a digital zillion track hard disk, microphone placement will affect the sound regardless. As will the selection of sounds you use from a tone box/sound font or whatever module you have. Sometimes the natural compression of tape will sound "better" (or so your ears may tell you) than going straight to disk. And so it goes on and on until one day we realise we forgot to write a bunch of good songs (for good read - headbanging, gentle, melodic or whatever it is you're into). I am enjoying what I hear on dmusic - I think it's pretty much accepted that Brian Eno won't be producing any of us on these places......but on the whole it's better than a lot of places I can think of. Where are the instructions for these forums ? I want cool emoticons like all the kids
mcarp555	Date: January 7, 2003 @ 3:33 AM I agree with many of the other responses, that I'd rather listen to a great song in a lousy recording than a horrible song that's over-produced. Isn't that one of the points behind DM - to fight against cookie-cutter pap being forced down our throats? " id="29741">Sure, I think everyone understands the concept of doing it better. We all have tapes in our closet that we pray the world never hears. Hopefully as time and finances allow, we're able to improve. But I think what's galling is someone who maybe has to write and record into a boombox, with one mic and a guitar (fitting it around the day job), being told by someone with money to burn, and (supposed) big-name interest, that "Sorry, your crappy tape isn't worthy". To many people that's an exceedingly personal and rude statement. It's like saying, "Hey, if you had taken better care of yourself, maybe your kids wouldn't have turned out so ugly". Excuse me? I agree with many of the other responses, that I'd rather listen to a great song in a lousy recording than a horrible song that's over-produced. Isn't that one of the points behind DM - to fight against cookie-cutter pap being forced down our throats?
Alleagenz	Date: January 7, 2003 @ 8:02 AM Hear hear!! Just to point out that my thread about cheese and original flavour is only a point of view, nothing hateful at all, this is a good thread!! I've had this argument with other people in other forums, i used to use cheap software to make my tunes, other artists that spend up to £3000 on gear were slating the likes of me but at the end of the day i feel that i came alot further than them, only because my music was heard by the right person at the right time, i have not been signed and have no fees, i have though got my music heard on a BBC video, which can't be bad So its not what you have its how you produce it, i mean a good footballer still scores a goal with a pair of cheap football boots
Svensta	Date: January 7, 2003 @ 9:29 AM Carpie is my hero. And Robert Smith kicks ass. Ah-men.
Jennae	Date: January 7, 2003 @ 10:33 AM whooo hoooo!!!!! adding Svensta to my cool list! ....damn no Robert smith Icon?? damn! Even south park has robert smith!! such a shame... :rotfl:
Elu	Date: January 7, 2003 @ 10:35 AM Ummm Milla...the Beatles members are some of the greatest producers in the history of music...not a good example for your point. You don't need to spend alot of time recording or writing if you have what they had....
Elu	Date: January 7, 2003 @ 10:43 AM one more thing.....I've been through many an A&R person with the final comment of "sorry, you need some polishing. Find a producer to help you shine your stuff"...'nough said. I was trying to lend a helping hand...so any artist who (in his or her eyes) is fine with what they do and are proud of their material need not take any of this to heart. Anyone else who wants to make it in the industry and still doesn't believe this should start walking around the block a few times and figure it out for themselves. Life is too short to spend time talking to those that do not listen or hear what they want to hear.....the world of music is what it is...unfair, unemotional and full of BS..if you want to make it, you have to play the game...such as life...
Elu	Date: January 7, 2003 @ 10:44 AM I would love to hear comments from any other artists on this site who have had experience with the industry....
mcarp555	Date: January 7, 2003 @ 11:03 AM Elu, don't even start trying to talk to me and Milla about the Beatles. Just don't. And to answer your last point, it only makes sense that if someone was serious about getting a label deal, they would pretty much have to invest some $$$ to get a strong, clean demo. Don't you clean a house or a car before you try to sell it? But your assumption that every artist on this site is here only to score a deal is just plain wrong. If that's all you're after, maybe that explains some of your apparant bitterness. Good luck dude; you seem to need it.
Jennae	Date: January 7, 2003 @ 12:20 PM you're older and you know better!! :lmao:" id="29767"> Mcarp... "you B nice!" you're older and you know better!!
Svensta	Date: January 7, 2003 @ 1:21 PM This is quite possibly the dumbest thing I have ever heard anyone say about a force in their realm like the Beatles. The idea they did all their work on production when they COMPLETELY changed the entire face of music is absurd. So I could mix the sounds of my two dogs farting, and so long as I had it worked professionally, I would get some music people to listen? (maybe that's not too good an argument, because my two mutts are more musical than some of the people who get radio airplay, but I digress) "I would love to hear comments from any other artists on this site who have had experience with the industry...." Maybe we are all taking offense because this is an ANTI-INDUSTRY site, and all you want to talk about is the needful things to interact with them. The entire point here is that the music is whats important." id="29770">"You don't need to spend alot of time recording or writing if you have what they had" This is quite possibly the dumbest thing I have ever heard anyone say about a force in their realm like the Beatles. The idea they did all their work on production when they COMPLETELY changed the entire face of music is absurd. So I could mix the sounds of my two dogs farting, and so long as I had it worked professionally, I would get some music people to listen? (maybe that's not too good an argument, because my two mutts are more musical than some of the people who get radio airplay, but I digress) "I would love to hear comments from any other artists on this site who have had experience with the industry...." Maybe we are all taking offense because this is an ANTI-INDUSTRY site, and all you want to talk about is the needful things to interact with them. The entire point here is that the music is whats important.
Svensta	Date: January 7, 2003 @ 1:24 PM Here's a thought for you: American Idol. That show (and the 'music' behind it), is an PRECISE example of what you are talking about, Elu. It's 95% production value. They dredged up some rude Limey, and made a popular show out of it, and will use that buzz to create a demand for Kelly Clarkewhatever. Funny how the music for the crowned 'idol' was written beforehand, for WHOMEVER won the contest. If you are talking about sales, then you are discussing ADVERTISING, in that case I agree with you, polish is essential for advertising. It's got NOTHING to do with musical creativity.
milladrive	Date: January 7, 2003 @ 3:29 PM Well, let's a look at it again, shall we? :smirk: "Some of the greatest Beatles songs were not only written in less than satisfactory conditions, but many were written under a contract deadline. In fact, I know of at least one song that was recorded and released in a single day, then sold millions of copies. Obviously, it has very little to do with how painstaking the work was, or how much overkill we wanna put on a recording." The first sentence above points to songs that were WRITTEN under less than satisfactory conditions, and WRITTEN under a contract deadline. Point: No time for detailing or goosing up, yet just fine for posterity. The second sentence pointed to an extreme rare case of a popular recording. However, point: it's _not_ always how much fine-tuning goes into a RECORDING! At the risk of doin' my own self-aggrandizing, I'm a graduate of the Audio Recording Technology Institute at Farmingdale University in NY, so I know what production is and how it can be accomplished. Again, I agree that there's nothing wrong with improving our craft. I think we always can use improvement. At the same time, how much energy do ya think someone who wants only to be a songwriter should spend on improving their production techniques? Whether writing or recording, tho, too much second-guessing, and, imo, much of the spontaneity and immediacy can be rendered flat. Sven and carpie both raise good points here, too, in that not everyone here is hoping to one day hobnob with Hilary and her cronies. In fact, I'd say very few of them are. I'll go as far as to say that if that's what one is lookin' for, bein' here could actually _hurt_ their chances, despite the quality of their music or production. Hilary doesn't like us. This is probably a good place to be when ya don't give a hoot about the usual A&R people, and the primary desire is to simply let their music be out there. Sites like this one are awesome, too, since they don't require that industry nonsense in order to be heard. It's all about the music, and thank goodness for the interweb. :groovin:" id="29774">I'm in love with this thread. "Ummm Milla...the Beatles members are some of the greatest producers in the history of music...not a good example for your point." Well, let's a look at it again, shall we? "Some of the greatest Beatles songs were not only written in less than satisfactory conditions, but many were written under a contract deadline. In fact, I know of at least one song that was recorded and released in a single day, then sold millions of copies. Obviously, it has very little to do with how painstaking the work was, or how much overkill we wanna put on a recording." The first sentence above points to songs that were WRITTEN under less than satisfactory conditions, and WRITTEN under a contract deadline. Point: No time for detailing or goosing up, yet just fine for posterity. The second sentence pointed to an extreme rare case of a popular recording. However, point: it's _not_ always how much fine-tuning goes into a RECORDING! At the risk of doin' my own self-aggrandizing, I'm a graduate of the Audio Recording Technology Institute at Farmingdale University in NY, so I know what production is and how it can be accomplished. Again, I agree that there's nothing wrong with improving our craft. I think we always can use improvement. At the same time, how much energy do ya think someone who wants only to be a songwriter should spend on improving their production techniques? Whether writing or recording, tho, too much second-guessing, and, imo, much of the spontaneity and immediacy can be rendered flat. Sven and carpie both raise good points here, too, in that not everyone here is hoping to one day hobnob with Hilary and her cronies. In fact, I'd say very few of them are. I'll go as far as to say that if that's what one is lookin' for, bein' here could actually _hurt_ their chances, despite the quality of their music or production. Hilary doesn't like us. This is probably a good place to be when ya don't give a hoot about the usual A&R people, and the primary desire is to simply let their music be out there. Sites like this one are awesome, too, since they don't require that industry nonsense in order to be heard. It's all about the music, and thank goodness for the interweb.
azhazhellfire	Date: January 7, 2003 @ 4:22 PM hehe, dont mess with milla when it comes to the beatles.
Ayesha	Date: January 7, 2003 @ 4:47 PM I have listened to the music,and to tell you the truth, you people cannot flow ,and it sounds wack! I'm currently in the music industry, and I can't believe you people call yourselves mc's ,and you can't rap worth shirt and it really sad.
Elu	Date: January 7, 2003 @ 5:07 PM who said my assumption was that every artist here wants a contract???...is that my assumption or yours? I don't recall saying that. And it is obvious that the word production means different things to different people. Those of you who idolize the Beatles..more power to you...they were great!...but again, they new production and they could fly with the tunes as can Elton John. If you know your craft then the point is mute. Production again means Arrangement, and Layering sounds. Production can and does encompass other areas but the basics are as mentioned. So where does that fit into the Beatles??...Ummm geeze, they had good arrangements and kick ass vocals, even on the fly...and they knew how to layer sounds.....(OMG!) hence they are producers. Engineering is directly related to sound quality...errrrr...you people frustrate me to no end...geeze! Get a book.
Elu	Date: January 7, 2003 @ 5:16 PM Fun stuff.....mcarp and milla...don't take it personally...it was never meant as a threat on your musicianhood...One might assume that those who take offense suffer most from the problem...but don't quote me because I have not listened to your stuff... And Svensta...Two dogs farting could definately be produced into a glorious song....but who would want to take the time to do it... And lastly...Anti industry site...that means you would all be anti-self. You are all anti-major. They run the industry and have made it what it is. But there is a independent industry that is in it for the artist as well...Keep it what it is and don't blow a gasket...independent artist does not mean anti-industry.
ChillinBuzz	Date: January 8, 2003 @ 2:25 AM Think of it like training to learn the ways of the force, but beware the dark side, for once you start down its path, forever will it control your destiny. Now, I dont care a shit what anyone thinks, if the industry really wants the next best musicians going for its puppet show, it's us they will want to plunder eventually, and bollocks to the comments from the so-called 'i know the industry' and 'the sun shines out Hilary's ass' people... and seeing as they haven't a clue on keeping their own brand of consumer piracy quiet from us, why the heck should we support the damn industry? for a few, its great. but i'd say the days of signed music being the goal of any musician will pass as the labels won't be forced into changing their habits easily, which is not only possible but unfortunately for them inevitable, and when they do, it will be too late to save their precious currency. If I make money from music, all the better. but to watch a person walk into a shop, buy my CD for £17 and knowing that i might see £2? and knowing the shop is getting 3 times more than me.... well, if it didnt even make you think again, you might well be in the wrong house dude.
Svensta	Date: January 8, 2003 @ 8:52 AM They sure have. They made it a price-gouging, anti-competitive monopoly, that looks to victimize both artist and fan. Good point, but it's not the point you were looking to make, I don't think. This IS anti-industry. This entire site was founded and flourishes under anti-recording industry sentiment because the industry is hellaciously flawed and needs some come-uppance. If you are trying to make it sound like DMusika is in the same industry as a recording label, you are mistaken. This is a resource for socio-economical protest and alternative. This is not a business, hence all the zillions of songs hosted for free. You are playing semantic games." id="29801">"They run the industry and have made it what it is." They sure have. They made it a price-gouging, anti-competitive monopoly, that looks to victimize both artist and fan. Good point, but it's not the point you were looking to make, I don't think. This IS anti-industry. This entire site was founded and flourishes under anti-recording industry sentiment because the industry is hellaciously flawed and needs some come-uppance. If you are trying to make it sound like DMusika is in the same industry as a recording label, you are mistaken. This is a resource for socio-economical protest and alternative. This is not a business, hence all the zillions of songs hosted for free. You are playing semantic games.
Elu	Date: January 8, 2003 @ 10:05 AM Actually Svensta...That was the point I was trying to make. Idependent artists still need distribution is this correct or incorrect in your eyes?...Media stores still go with suppliers not individuals...so distribution is a necessary evil. Major labels think that they should control every aspect..(A very bad thing)...when all they really need to do is get paid to promote their artists and get them on the radio and in stores...this would be the ideal situation. But that's not what they do. So, it is possible as an independent artist to start your own radio campaign as long as you can get your stuff out there. But you have to have it available to the public through a commercial vender for all of this to work. I think ordering from the web is adequate...this is what I am doing currently. My record label sells on their site and keeps half for postage and footwork. They also advertise world wide through internet....Not a bad deal. The independent "industry" is the way of the future. Major labels are already losing money because of people like us on sites like these. And Svensta...this is a business, "the music business."
milladrive	Date: January 8, 2003 @ 10:27 AM How?" id="29813">Thank you, Elu, for all these lessons. Let's try another? "Major labels are already losing money because of people like us on sites like these." How?
Svensta	Date: January 8, 2003 @ 10:31 AM I meant that THIS is not a business, meaning DMusic. This is a forum and a collective, not a business, but you are correct in that the delivery and promotion of music IS a business. You are correct above as well, two essential criteria for success with be the exposure necessary to stir up demand, and the ability to supply that demand with your product, Bus Econ 101. However, the current regime has chokeholds on BOTH those things currently, with arranged marriages with the massive radio companies, and exclusivity and point-of-purchase deals with major music vendors. THAT is what we are protesting. Unfortunately, they are ALSO the source of nearly unlimited funds for enhances, spectacular production for the musicians they see fit to bestow contracts to. Hence, I submit to you that music is cheapened by the ability of this monopoly to regurgitate a genre, package and produce it, market it to hell and back, and generate tons of sales. Great production and advertisement is now the trued and true way to music-business success, where it SHOULD be (and originally WAS) the music ITSELF that was important. You seemed to be championing the cause of the packaging, and not that product.
Elu	Date: January 8, 2003 @ 11:49 AM Milla...the majors have shown a loss for more than (2) years in a row and they are stating it is because of free music on the internet. I did a paper on it. They blame it on independent musicians and independent distributors. This is an independent music site is it not?? I am an advocate for independent artists not major labels. Let's keep the record straight. The only way to get the majors to lose hold on the industry is to support independent distributors, artists and labels. Everyone should get a piece of the pie. And get only what they deserve to get. Music industry professionals have already stated that it is only a matter of time before the first internet superstar is born...in which they will have no control over or profit on.
Svensta	Date: January 8, 2003 @ 12:11 PM Who gives a DAMN what they THINK. I demand to see proof. Otherwise, I offer this rebuttal: "I blame it on lack of new groundbreaking music to generate interest, and the organized (and legal) boycotting of released materials by an enraged customer base" As soon as you _prove_ to me the dropoff is due to the Internet and filesharing, I will retract my statement." id="29820">I am interesting in the proof in your paper. I will grant that yes, for the trailing 24 months, the sales of RIAA members are decreasing. "They blame it on independent musicians and independent distributors" Who gives a DAMN what they THINK. I demand to see proof. Otherwise, I offer this rebuttal: "I blame it on lack of new groundbreaking music to generate interest, and the organized (and legal) boycotting of released materials by an enraged customer base" As soon as you _prove_ to me the dropoff is due to the Internet and filesharing, I will retract my statement.
milladrive	Date: January 8, 2003 @ 12:17 PM They sure have, and they sure do. The majors have shown a lotta things that aren't necessarily true in recent years, and their "studies" are more incredibly biased than the NRA's. Believe everything they say? In truth, they're literally conjuring up sales that don't exist. "Losing money?" What, based on previous years? Yes, they've been showing a decrease since their peak year of 2000, but even if I were to buy into the concept that p2p contributes to the majors' "losing money," which I don't, sites like this one take nothing from the RIAA. Nada. Independent artists _intent_ on remaining independent mean zero to the majors' industry. The majors are too busy calculating their next American Idol to even care about taking "a chance" on the artists here. And what fascinates me even more is that, while the majors control almost 95% of all musical copies sold, they handle only 0.00001% (ruff estimate) of the world's available artists. In fact, even a huge chunk (read: majority) of the artists _signed_ to a major label never see a dime of profit. Based on the standard current freshman contract, an artist must sell about 250,000 (count'em) copies of an album before they, the artist, sees a profit. Read this article, then feel free to comment some more. I am so entertained by your words. I do agree, tho, that it's only a matter of time till the first internet-only hotshot comes along, but that's hardly a reaching premonition, and I can bet the majors pitch to him/her when they do." id="29821">"...the majors have shown a loss for more than (2) years in a row and they are stating it is because of free music on the internet. ... They blame it on independent musicians and independent distributors." They sure have, and they sure do. The majors have shown a lotta things that aren't necessarily true in recent years, and their "studies" are more incredibly biased than the NRA's. Believe everything they say? In truth, they're literally conjuring up sales that don't exist. "Losing money?" What, based on previous years? Yes, they've been showing a decrease since their peak year of 2000, but even if I were to buy into the concept that p2p contributes to the majors' "losing money," which I don't, sites like this one take nothing from the RIAA. Nada. Independent artists _intent_ on remaining independent mean zero to the majors' industry. The majors are too busy calculating their next American Idol to even care about taking "a chance" on the artists here. And what fascinates me even more is that, while the majors control almost 95% of all musical copies sold, they handle only 0.00001% (ruff estimate) of the world's available artists. In fact, even a huge chunk (read: majority) of the artists _signed_ to a major label never see a dime of profit. Based on the standard current freshman contract, an artist must sell about 250,000 (count'em) copies of an album before they, the artist, sees a profit. Read this article, then feel free to comment some more. I am so entertained by your words. I do agree, tho, that it's only a matter of time till the first internet-only hotshot comes along, but that's hardly a reaching premonition, and I can bet the majors pitch to him/her when they do.
mcarp555	Date: January 8, 2003 @ 3:15 PM Well, I'm ready to volunteer for the job, Milla. Unless my music isn't polished enough. . .
Svensta	Date: January 8, 2003 @ 3:25 PM Not to worry Carpster. Just order up some of those "Super Shammy" chamois cloths and polish, polish, polish.
milladrive	Date: January 8, 2003 @ 6:52 PM Anyone got some Lemon Pledge?
princess-angry	Date: January 8, 2003 @ 7:28 PM I am sick of real artsts not seeing any of the money and all this bull crap artists on MTV that can't sing get all the money and sales!!!!
pog	Date: January 8, 2003 @ 8:12 PM BTW... if you have the software, it's also a good idea to save money by exporting the studio master tracks to a cd, and re-mixing it in you home studio. Then you can do it in your own time." id="29846">It's true that some really ordinary stuff gets through, but this is because they paid for it (I think we've already established this in a few ways). IMO, but it's a fact of life that some ppl have spent hours and hours learning how to mike up an amp properly, which is the first steps towards becoming a grumpy, yet much sought after muso Yes, it is possible to become an elite home based studio engineer, and you could prolly put out an album better than nirvana's bleach album, and at a tenth of the price (even though it was only a coupla hungie bucks), but if you are gonna spend all of that time learning about recording (or managing), how can you say you're giving your instrument 100% ? (Trust me... it turns into a lifetime journey trying to operate everything successfully all at once), however it is worth noting that if you wanna do all these jobs, they all contribute towards the big piccy. I feel that artists should practice toward proficiency, first, then work their ass off at it, save up for a decent bracket of studio time (try to work for $2500 ($5000AU), no more, no less. The key here is to go into the studio with all your parts for every member perfected, to achive the objective of making the best recording possible, in the shortest possible time (my record is 5 guitar tracks in an hour...all flawless). I am aware that ppl can do those home based recordings, but I gotta tell ya... nothing compares to sitting in an acoustically built studio, singing into a 5000-10000 dollar "sexy" mic, with the cans on, and that's a fact. BTW... if you have the software, it's also a good idea to save money by exporting the studio master tracks to a cd, and re-mixing it in you home studio. Then you can do it in your own time.
ChillinBuzz	Date: January 8, 2003 @ 8:14 PM go CDC!
sinai	Date: January 8, 2003 @ 11:05 PM yeah, some ppl on here could use better production, but with tha budget that alot of us have can allow for it, not to mention a rush to create ur music without taking tha time to hone ur production skillz first (hell i've spent monthz trying to figure out tha everything in tha 60$ version of Cakewalk'z software, how pathetic iz that!?!)...on a completely unrelated note...to any new artist preparing to upload on this site, take a minute to think about which genre u belong in first, i caved in on my fellow bandmatez criez of "but we're a hip-hop band!" and have us in that section, a place where mizxoncevd iz horribly miscast...yeah i know who carez about genres (in fact i think therez another forum about that in here somewhere where i really should have posted this at huh? lol)but i invite you to try and get snoop dogg lovers to giva shit about white boyz singing about witchcraft
Elu	Date: January 9, 2003 @ 11:35 AM I agree Pog...I was the lead guitarist in every single band I was in...now that I spend most of my time writing and thinking about layers I can't play as well as I used too...and damn, those blisters happen every time I play now...I almost hate picking the guitar up just for that reason...damn. I still love my guitar!...
princess-angry	Date: January 9, 2003 @ 8:17 PM thanx chilli!!!!
thumbtack	Date: January 11, 2003 @ 2:27 PM Jeff (Elu) is right...last year (2002) independent music sold a higher percentage than EMI. And was not far from BMG. The cat is out of the bag, and if you ever chased a pissed off cat, you know it ain't going back in it. Keep buying independent music...you can't fight the billions of dollars they have, but you can make them irelevant. Universal Music Group * U.S. market share: 28.9% Warner Music Group * U.S. market share: 17% Sony Music Entertainment * U.S. market share: 16.5% Bertelsmann Music Group * U.S. market share: 14.8% Independent Music (From Soundscan) * U.S. market Share 13.2% EMI Group * U.S. market share: 9.3%
Elu	Date: January 13, 2003 @ 10:03 AM Thanks Thumbtack...I couldn't find my paper..
milladrive	Date: January 13, 2003 @ 10:16 AM DMusic take from the majors. If we feel like talkin' about independent labels whom's job it is to _sell_ copies, then perhaps someone should've told me. DM's primary business is not to sell music. Selling music here is a side-thought. A byproduct. I'll still stand by my assertion that this site takes nothing for the majors." id="30204">"Selling" is different from "sharing." I thought the debate was about what sites like DMusic take from the majors. If we feel like talkin' about independent labels whom's job it is to _sell_ copies, then perhaps someone should've told me. DM's primary business is not to sell music. Selling music here is a side-thought. A byproduct. I'll still stand by my assertion that this site takes nothing for the majors.
olethros	Date: January 13, 2003 @ 10:53 AM I am curious to see what sells. Is most of the sales new releases by new bands? How much do those bands last? Is a lot of the traffic in older CDs by super-famous bands that keep on selling? How can super nova stars sell if their stuff is played on the radio all the time? Don't people get bored of it? (apparently not) To get back on track of the discussion. A lot of artists could use some production, but they are not willing to spend the effort unless they realise that a lot of people are willing to listen to their music and [even (!)] ask for more! A few years ago I had not payed a lot of attention to the production of my stuff, but nowadays I try a bit more. It is still not perfect, but it is the amount of effort I can put and be satisfied with the results. The key here is the proportion of effort spent relative to the results. I don't mind spending some time re-recording vocals or guitars, or maybe tweaking volumes and filters on each channel, or playing a bit with the stereo image, or adding a couple of background effects/noises. But I might not spend too much time playing around with drum tracks to make them completely realistic, or fine-tune bridges and do 100% smooth transitions... I usually get the best results when I build everything with a mind for good production from the beginning, slowly building everything together as I go along. If you record a lot and leave the sequencing/post-production for later you never get around to doing it properly and the track feels disjoint.
Elu	Date: January 13, 2003 @ 2:24 PM Well Olethros... You have stated my sentiments exactly. What sells is independent releases...I have sold a few hundred copies...and there are other artists who have sold many more that me... and as far as putting things together...it seems we work an aweful lot alike...
asskiller	Date: January 15, 2003 @ 2:57 PM i figure the artists cant leave the production to the producers isnt that how the big names do it? on dmusic there are probably a lot more artists than artist/producers. pardon my being redundant if what i just said is so.
bastardsofglory	Date: January 15, 2003 @ 3:39 PM i could have sworn i commented on this thread oh well, now i have
Elu	Date: January 15, 2003 @ 6:53 PM you know...redundancy is a safe practice. I am going to go back out on the limb to get hammered one more time...but asskiller is right...if you are going to be an independent artist you gotta know your trade all the way, that means through production. That was my original point, if you want to play with the big boys, you gotta learn the big toys...umm girls too. I'm sure I need not explain again. By the way asskiller...WTF is that picture?...nasty!
victorsskull	Date: January 15, 2003 @ 9:53 PM the reason I wont go out and spend money on prduction is because my chances of getting famous are about as good as winning the lottery.
sinai	Date: January 16, 2003 @ 4:01 AM i buy lottery ticketz, if tha fucking spice girlz can get famous...there aint much more motivation anyone else needz
icisnizz	Date: January 16, 2003 @ 7:37 AM --William Faulkner, interview with Paris Review, 1956 My point...'good production' will only make your music fit in with others... Pollocks art was no where near perfect to some people but was to him. Every artist can judge their own music/art and leave it at that. Once you start worring about what others want you to be, your not an artist any more... -- I don't know if that made any sense but thought I'd type away since I haven't made any long comments in quite some time. l8tz nizz " id="30479">I'm the same way...Whenever I work on a song I usually try my best to finish it right away because if I leave it sitting it takes away from the mood I was in when I created it. Some of my songs are even missing things but I really don't care because I'd rather move on then trying to create a masterpiece. That can take away from future creations. I just look at it as art and to me you can't put a price tag on it. The reason why I share. "The aim of every artist is to arrest motion, which is life, by artificial means and hold it fixed so that a hundred years later, when a stranger looks at it, it moves again since it is life.... This is the artist's way of scribbling 'Kilroy was here' on the wall of the final and irrevocable oblivion through which he must someday pass." --William Faulkner, interview with Paris Review, 1956 My point...'good production' will only make your music fit in with others... Pollocks art was no where near perfect to some people but was to him. Every artist can judge their own music/art and leave it at that. Once you start worring about what others want you to be, your not an artist any more... -- I don't know if that made any sense but thought I'd type away since I haven't made any long comments in quite some time. l8tz nizz
Wordsense	Date: January 16, 2003 @ 8:09 AM ^pure genius is held within those statements
jkate	Date: January 16, 2003 @ 9:25 AM dmusic.com is helping to foster it. But right now my favorite bands are industry bands, and I'm USED to hear crystal sharp vocals, that sound three dimensional in headphones, and layers and fills that make the music rich. Yes, this is produced (sometimes "over") sound, but this is what, for all intents and purposes, is industry "standard." We look at the best cinematography in 1980 (jaws) and think of how crappily shot and edited that film was. Or Star Wars, the original, for that matter. But it doesn't cease our enjoyment of those films. So when I hear Jennae's (absolutely LOVELY) 67 Chevy, part of me analytically says, "she needs a condenser mic" or "its too fuzzy" but then I put that away and listen to her music, her expression. It's gorgeous. I love the music even though it's not crystal clear or layered, so some of you need to learn to put that aside when you hear less than "industry" recording quality. It is what it IS, don't castigate artists by labeling their stuff shit just because the mix isn't great. HOWEVER. Some artists send me such badly mastered songs that I literally cannot see past the too loud guitars and the muddy vocals, even if the sound may have potential. There is a point where the artist MUST take responsibility for their art. Have you ever walked into a museum and seen a dirty condom nailed to a canvas? Who the hell thinks this is art? It's bullshit. But someone gets paid for it. It's like The Emporer's New Clothes - everyone goes along with the lie because people are afraid or sycophants. Education in production is the second smartest thing any serious musician can do - education in industry business is the first. Unlike many of you, I have no great deeds to prove my authority in this subject, and when my songs are eventually able to be streamed you will hear I'm a novice in balancing voice, clip and instruments. But I'm learning, and my "roughs" that go up are just that - roughs. I'm here for the community of music and I learn something every time I hear another artist, produced or not. I welcome critiques because I give honest critiques in the spirit of education and betterment as an artist. Last though...Please stop "LABELING" everything - it's killing the pilgrim soul in me. Differences in "recordings" and "demo" and such...If the majority says your vocals need to be louder, make them louder and stop bitching that people aren't "getting" your music! You want your shit to be enjoyed and understood, don't you? Stop whining about your artistic license and your "art" if you can't deal with the criticisms given." id="30482">There have been a lot of really good points coming from Elu and Milla. But some of the others are getting bent out of shape on frigging semantics. Labels are what ruined this industry. The point of music is YES, to express it, very well said Svensta. The "pilgrim soul" of music needs to be kept alive and I'm thrilled that dmusic.com is helping to foster it. But right now my favorite bands are industry bands, and I'm USED to hear crystal sharp vocals, that sound three dimensional in headphones, and layers and fills that make the music rich. Yes, this is produced (sometimes "over") sound, but this is what, for all intents and purposes, is industry "standard." We look at the best cinematography in 1980 (jaws) and think of how crappily shot and edited that film was. Or Star Wars, the original, for that matter. But it doesn't cease our enjoyment of those films. So when I hear Jennae's (absolutely LOVELY) 67 Chevy, part of me analytically says, "she needs a condenser mic" or "its too fuzzy" but then I put that away and listen to her music, her expression. It's gorgeous. I love the music even though it's not crystal clear or layered, so some of you need to learn to put that aside when you hear less than "industry" recording quality. It is what it IS, don't castigate artists by labeling their stuff shit just because the mix isn't great. HOWEVER. Some artists send me such badly mastered songs that I literally cannot see past the too loud guitars and the muddy vocals, even if the sound may have potential. There is a point where the artist MUST take responsibility for their art. Have you ever walked into a museum and seen a dirty condom nailed to a canvas? Who the hell thinks this is art? It's bullshit. But someone gets paid for it. It's like The Emporer's New Clothes - everyone goes along with the lie because people are afraid or sycophants. Education in production is the second smartest thing any serious musician can do - education in industry business is the first. Unlike many of you, I have no great deeds to prove my authority in this subject, and when my songs are eventually able to be streamed you will hear I'm a novice in balancing voice, clip and instruments. But I'm learning, and my "roughs" that go up are just that - roughs. I'm here for the community of music and I learn something every time I hear another artist, produced or not. I welcome critiques because I give honest critiques in the spirit of education and betterment as an artist. Last though...Please stop "LABELING" everything - it's killing the pilgrim soul in me. Differences in "recordings" and "demo" and such...If the majority says your vocals need to be louder, make them louder and stop bitching that people aren't "getting" your music! You want your shit to be enjoyed and understood, don't you? Stop whining about your artistic license and your "art" if you can't deal with the criticisms given.
mcarp555	Date: January 16, 2003 @ 4:36 PM But I think most of us are just having a problem with someone climbing up on their soapbox in a 'public' forum and just proclaiming, "Hey, some of y'all have a really lousy sound! How do you expect to impress anybody like that?" Now what good does that do anybody, other than helping us identify one more ass among us? If the people who make such blanket statements feel we're not getting their point, here's another one they've probably missed: Who asked you, and why should your opinion count anyway?" id="30489">Fair enough. If I ask your opinion I need to be able to deal with hearing a response I may not like. By the same token, if I'm checking out an artist and I offer honest feedback, I hope they will be of a like mind (without me saying, "Your music sucks!" or something similar). But I think most of us are just having a problem with someone climbing up on their soapbox in a 'public' forum and just proclaiming, "Hey, some of y'all have a really lousy sound! How do you expect to impress anybody like that?" Now what good does that do anybody, other than helping us identify one more ass among us? If the people who make such blanket statements feel we're not getting their point, here's another one they've probably missed: Who asked you, and why should your opinion count anyway?
sinai	Date: January 16, 2003 @ 6:04 PM couldnt have said it any better myself!
Elu	Date: January 16, 2003 @ 6:58 PM Thank you very much. Sincerely, Me" id="30515">mcarp...I definately am impressed with your labeling of me as a person...did we go to different schools together?? You sound to me like another artist who is on a soap box but doesn't want the attention on himself, but is yet self glorified by putting someone else down. I don't know you and I don't pretend to nor do I think that I would even want to after hearing a label applied to me as a person. If my opinion doesn't count, then neither does yours or any-one elses for that matter. So why are we all here??Opinions are like a$$hole$ and yours seems to stink more than others. In addition I would like to add that you seem to be the only one who doesn't get what the orignal intent was about...I listened to your stuff...its not bad, but I've heard it before. If you don't want to take part in a discussion and hear it for what it's worth then why post?...again, who is on the soapbox?? And finally...I could have sworn that I did not say "Hey, some of y'all have a really lousy sound!" First of all I do not come from the South...and secondly, you have twisted every word of that sentence to make your point. You sir are an ivalide! Thank you very much. Sincerely, Me
jkate	Date: January 16, 2003 @ 7:08 PM mcarp: I didn't get that sense from Elu's post at all. I thought he made a valid point. Maybe I'm practicing what I preach to the extreme. Perhaps I looked past the way Elu was sending his message and analyzed the message itself. Kind of like looking past a shitty recording and analyzing the song itself. Either encased in a pearl or encased in a turd, the truth is the truth. And some artists need a little more attention spent producing. If a list were made, I'd probably not agree with Elu on whose sound sucks, but music is subjective, so Elu is just as entitled to his opinion as we all are. There have been a few recordings that I've actually made faces on, then remembered it's not a signed artist I'm listening to, it's a homegrown. Then the face goes away. That kneejerk reaction is just what Elu's expressing, in an eloquent way or not, it doesn't matter. At any rate, thanks to Elu and Milla and Sven and mcarp (and others I've missed) for a very educational read. This is like a religion topic - you're sure to get heated arguments from each side. My admittedly amateur advice: Take what you like and leave the rest. The world is not all or nothing.
mcarp555	Date: January 16, 2003 @ 7:24 PM Elu: Whatever. As noted by many artists in preceeding posts, everyone would love to have better production. Few can for various reasons. If someone is playing a uke into an answering machine and posting it here, do they really need someone with all the equipment you have telling them they need better production? Like they don't already know? You didn't like my message? Tough. I didn't like yours, so I guess we're even now.
Svensta	Date: January 16, 2003 @ 7:52 PM And you thought you would find some respite from creationism in here. You poor, poor fool, you.
jkate	Date: January 16, 2003 @ 9:36 PM I love you all, though.
Elu	Date: January 17, 2003 @ 10:39 AM Isn't individualism wonderful?....I dig dmusic. Rock and Roll!
jkate	Date: January 17, 2003 @ 10:57 AM
Alleagenz	Date: January 17, 2003 @ 12:25 PM A superb thread ELU, give yer self a pat on the back
leflaw	Date: January 21, 2003 @ 7:13 PM Production is production. It takes as much effort to produce "street" as classical or jazz. Different ears, thats all. By the way, anybody see the webcast of Lester Chambers (and me too) playing at the Kennedy Center on January 5? Its at www.Kennedy-Center.org . Good old fashioned rock n roll and blues and jazz and reggae..... The B3 organist, Dick Sims was with Eric Clapton's band for years, and the bass player Charles Flether, was with Marvin Gaye! What a trip. Can't wait to do more." id="30893">Sounds is Sound. Period. experienced rappers spend three grand for an Akai Mpc 3000 so they can have drum sounds that sound as shitty as the shitty drums on the latest release. It would be jive to use a Neumann condensor or Beyer Ribbon to record a real snare in a tiled room when you can just as easily spend 3 grand to sample a sample of a sample of a sample and get exactly the sound you want. A good musician should be able to make music with a trash can. Remember the drum sounds from "Happy Jack" ? Production is production. It takes as much effort to produce "street" as classical or jazz. Different ears, thats all. By the way, anybody see the webcast of Lester Chambers (and me too) playing at the Kennedy Center on January 5? Its at www.Kennedy-Center.org . Good old fashioned rock n roll and blues and jazz and reggae..... The B3 organist, Dick Sims was with Eric Clapton's band for years, and the bass player Charles Flether, was with Marvin Gaye! What a trip. Can't wait to do more.
LoBuster	Date: January 22, 2003 @ 1:24 AM I gotta agree .. I hear some of the stuff here .. its got good ideas .. but the mastering of the song and final progression sucks so badly .. well .. what can I say .. I cant upplaod any of my stuff caus of the 404's that come :/ well well ..
johnnygnote	Date: January 22, 2003 @ 5:23 AM As far as equipment all of the songs on my first self produced CD were recorded on a Fostex X26 and mixed to a Sony Walkman Pro all instruments, vocals and engineering done by Self. Some of the songs turned out pretty good some not. The intention was to create tapes for muscians to Listen to as work tapes for the "real" studio. I later went back and listened and realized they weren't half bad, digitized the analog and the result is my First CD. Then I took the step upgraded my computer, spent 50 bucks on Cakewalk Guitar Track 2, searched out free plugins, pirated a few, bought a decent recording mic, a Behringer mini mixer and a few odds an ends and now I have a pretty decent digital recording studio. Some of it is new to me and some not so new to me because I have 30 years computer experience. Not everyone has the benefits of the knowledge but the internet is nothing but information and a means to find it. I for one am willing to share my experience, music and expertise with anyone who is willing to ask. As far as criticising the quality of production or expertise of songwriting, it's important to give constructive criticism as well as get it. I say Play on brothers and sisters and keep on rockin!!!! Listen to your heart, it won't lie! And most of all work together to create the INDIESTRY!!" id="30946">In 1976 I was one of 4 featured artists on an album entitled BF Deal Sampler Vol 1 it was mine as well as Nanci Griffths and 2 other artists first album. The engineer (Bill Blachley) recorded the whole thing as a 2 track live mix. For the times it was a work of art a tribute to not only the musicians but the Engineer's expertise. That record now sells for 200 dollars to collectors. I later appeared on a song that was used in the Texas Chainsaw Massacre cult film. It was written by a friend of mine that later became Jimmy Buffets first Choral Reefer guitarist. We all recorded it at a home studio during a jam session in Austin TX in the late 70's. It is now a cult classic. Since then I have been part of recordings of all kinds some polished some not. The thing I see here is that if we are all here to help and support each other then let's do that. Some of us are on a different level than others. Years ago when I Played on the streets of Austin I met a young "boy" who was sitting playing his guitar in short terms "he sucked" but he had determination, I remember encouraging him. That was in 1974 I later went back to Austin in 1994 to do a 20th anniversary reunion concert with some friends at a local hang out. There were people like TimBuk 3 and other famous and not so famous people that had played there over the years. One of the nights there was this band called Shoulders. The lead singer was fantastic and quite a monster, it was that same Boy become a Man. Time is our friend or enemy. As far as equipment all of the songs on my first self produced CD were recorded on a Fostex X26 and mixed to a Sony Walkman Pro all instruments, vocals and engineering done by Self. Some of the songs turned out pretty good some not. The intention was to create tapes for muscians to Listen to as work tapes for the "real" studio. I later went back and listened and realized they weren't half bad, digitized the analog and the result is my First CD. Then I took the step upgraded my computer, spent 50 bucks on Cakewalk Guitar Track 2, searched out free plugins, pirated a few, bought a decent recording mic, a Behringer mini mixer and a few odds an ends and now I have a pretty decent digital recording studio. Some of it is new to me and some not so new to me because I have 30 years computer experience. Not everyone has the benefits of the knowledge but the internet is nothing but information and a means to find it. I for one am willing to share my experience, music and expertise with anyone who is willing to ask. As far as criticising the quality of production or expertise of songwriting, it's important to give constructive criticism as well as get it. I say Play on brothers and sisters and keep on rockin!!!! Listen to your heart, it won't lie! And most of all work together to create the INDIESTRY!!
jkate	Date: January 22, 2003 @ 9:40 AM nicely said g
olethros	Date: January 22, 2003 @ 10:04 AM Hm.. OK, question, so, I make a CD, I like it, how do I distribute it to people that are not going to d/l something from the net? For example I make a nice single with 3 new-wave greek folk songs. Obviously I want to distribute to greece. Broadband internet in greece has not taken off. At all. And the music industry there is pretty strange. It is singer-centric. There are no 'bands' to speak of. So, imagine, no Internet. Radio stations locked in to a particular sound. No real bands, just support instrumentalists that are only known within the music 'industry' itself. How do you distribute indy?
AtSleep	Date: January 22, 2003 @ 12:46 PM olethros, You get off your ass and get on the next plane to Greece!!! Indie is indie! Independent... You shouldn't rely on radio stations and such... You go there and distribute yourself...
olethros	Date: January 22, 2003 @ 2:52 PM What venues would I play in? In my hometown there is no place where an indy band would be able to play. Oh, I forgot, I don't even have a band - I guess the plan is: 1) Make band 2) Play in local venues 3) Make CD 4) Sell it at every appearence. 5) Repeat, expanding your range of venues - and don't forget to set up some kind of way for people to listen to your music when you don't appear at their locality. Or I guess you could create 'clone bands' and let them propagate throughout the world! Music worm! Argh. I must be INSANE. Or just stupid.
AtSleep	Date: January 22, 2003 @ 4:10 PM Personally I love the struggle... Me and a friend of mine released a very non seriouse demo awhile ago... Now I'm working on my own solo demo and, honestly, I can't wait to go out and promote myself once it's done and recorded... Venues aren't a problem... If you're demanding discusting amounts of money though, then yeah, they might not want you... I've never been to Greece but I'm sure there are ALOT of restaurants and clubs over there... Get one a bike and go door to door place smiley here since I don't know how to use this. I'm sure planning to do that here... People WILL catch on if your music is good... Once you've gotten a small group of people who dig your stuff, it's basicly just word of mouth... Although having the internet blow up there would help alot too and add yet another smiley here
Elu	Date: January 22, 2003 @ 4:37 PM the truth of the matter is that you can't beat airplay. It is absolutely #1 when it comes to sales and promotion. I have my stuff in a lot of places, but I can't be in all those places, and I'm not playing live, so I try to get radio play... Most college stations will play anything and many other stations have sindicated shows that might play independent stuff...mostly small stations that are not connected with companies such as Clear Channel...errrrrrrrrr. (they suck) They have a friggen monopoly on who they let in...and I thought payola was illegal! ~
johnnygnote	Date: January 23, 2003 @ 3:12 AM Olethros, sounds like you have a pretty interesting situation, As far as the internet goes I'm sure you're aware of the various places you can sell your CD if not let me know, I know of a couple of places to start besides here that offer pretty good deals to artists who want to sell their CD on line. As far as locally, sounds like you're gonna need to create your own venue and sales technigues. I like your music and think you deserve to be heard by your local folks.
Big-Bones	Date: January 23, 2003 @ 7:48 AM i understand your perspective i jus happen to disagree...
Alleagenz	Date: January 23, 2003 @ 11:11 AM I think the world of music is a big slice of cheese, how cheesy can you be? OK if your tune is liked by a label, they will surely make it into cheese, so all original sounding artists will never hear their true ORIGINAL music. Like it or not cheese sells! The only person i seen making bedroom music and making it big would be Daniel Beddingfield, his demo would not have been brilliant, productionwise and mastering are left to the Pro's.
leflaw	Date: January 23, 2003 @ 4:49 PM THE MUSIC INDIESTRY!!! I LOVE IT!!!!
Jennae	Date: January 24, 2003 @ 12:02 AM My opinion: First of all thanks to my girl jkate for the props on 67 chevy..... But like she said, Although some of our recordings aren't perfect......nor mastered or edited the best.... I can't tell you how many I have listened too because of the ambiance, soul, or feelings they give me.... or just because........damn it! I like I feel that if one person, just one, happens to like my music and listens to it..... well for me... it's kinda all I need. It's a matter of what you need or are looking to get from your music. It's not necessarily what I am going to make off my music..... it's more about what cha give and what cha get from it....for me anyways... I personally am learning to produce my own music.....and learning... hell to play guitar even for that matter.....soley because I am independent and have no musicians to work with besides my online fellow collaborators. so.....may I remind you...... live music in bars, clubs and concerts even are hardly ever the best produced product... But yet there is a reason why we go to see it.
johnnygnote	Date: January 24, 2003 @ 7:37 AM Make mine Brie.
jkate	Date: January 24, 2003 @ 8:08 AM Hence the plus of a community like this...we rely on each other to say things like Elu has said at the very beginning, you know, CONSTRUCTIVE criticism, not just pointless cruelty. The fuzziness of Jennae's recordings exist, but they can't quite seem to overshadow her gorgeous voice :)" id="31149">Jennae the two originals I have up are pretty sad, really, mix wise and singing wise. After mucking around with it for so long, I tend to accept the mistakes and only after being away from the file long enough do I come back and think "Holy crap, why did I think I was on the note there??" Now, I'm working on rerecording. And using different tools. Hence the plus of a community like this...we rely on each other to say things like Elu has said at the very beginning, you know, CONSTRUCTIVE criticism, not just pointless cruelty. The fuzziness of Jennae's recordings exist, but they can't quite seem to overshadow her gorgeous voice
Jennae	Date: January 24, 2003 @ 8:55 PM um it's called.......how the hell do I work the CUbase program?? every song basically was me learning to record for the first time... and use my program..... and i was unaware of how to work the effects at that time..... so eh you know...... some day I will remix now that I am getting it down to a science..... but like the album cover says... they are alll SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
sinai	Date: January 25, 2003 @ 2:38 AM exactly Jennae, all of my songz are done ina trial by fire system of learning cakewalk...i know about an inch of a mile long program...but hell thatz half tha fun
Jennae	Date: January 25, 2003 @ 4:57 AM you got it Sin!! Gotta be true to the experience.

~~Previous 100~~

Page: [ 1 2 ]

Next 100

Post A Reply
From:	guest	(Icons - Linking)
Post: