quote: | Originally posted by deegee
I'd like to suggest a couple of challenges for you that may help you unlock what's hindering you. Limitations (and I find this in my professional life all the time, which is in a creative field) enhance creativity, while unlimited options can actually reduce it. |
This is precisely why I advised him to get off the computer and get to work with only his TR-8 and one other synth (Novation or System 1). Start experimenting and exploring, as I've already suggested, instead of throwing in every possible sample, fx, and synth lines into your WIPs.
Brian Eno wrote an entire article about this: http://archive.wired.com/wired/archive/7.01/eno.html
An excerpt:
"The trouble begins with a design philosophy that equates "more options" with "greater freedom." Designers struggle endlessly with a problem that is almost nonexistent for users: "How do we pack the maximum number of options into the minimum space and price?" In my experience, the instruments and tools that endure (because they are loved by their users) have limited options.
Software options proliferate extremely easily, too easily in fact, because too many options create tools that can't ever be used intuitively. Intuitive actions confine the detail work to a dedicated part of the brain, leaving the rest of one's mind free to respond with attention and sensitivity to the changing texture of the moment. With tools, we crave intimacy. This appetite for emotional resonance explains why users - when given a choice - prefer deep rapport over endless options. You can't have a relationship with a device whose limits are unknown to you, because without limits it keeps becoming something else."
Another thing, Juan. Stop trying to get it "right" and "perfect" all the time. This is the biggest obstacle to creativity, imo. Computers and software get it "right," which is so often antithetical to art. Don't be afraid to make mistakes and experiment, as all good music and works of art are imperfect, and in that they have a more "human" element to them, making them rather more "right" than they should be, as it were.
Here's an example of a well-known classic, where only a few machines are used and "happy accidents" (aka experimentation) and limits produce the desired result:
"The following comment comes from Lee In Sync himself, on the music released on "Storm":
"There are only 4 instruments in the track - all Roland, 2 SH-101s, 1 TR-808 and 1 TR-909. There was no hardware sequencer either. Everything was synched using the drum machine triggers. The notes were recorded on the SH-101 onboard sequencers, so the tune was very limited. Also, one of the SH-101s was not working properly. I could not record the same note twice in the sequencer for some reason. You can't really set up a more basic studio than I used for that track. The track was a production nightmare in reality. I am surprised it ever made it to vinyl. There is tape noise on the recording where the cassette deck level was way to low. But....it does sound like rain. It all went wrong but ended up right it seems".
Last edited by AlphaStarred on Dec-26-2014 at 20:05
|