|
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
That's an interesting possibility, but I think that issue is quite specific. I find strong narrative voices infect your mind in general, whether you're a writer or not. If you spend a lot of time in the company of a particularly strong narrator, when you put the book down you can find yourself thinking in that character's voice. I tend to aim for strong narrative voices myself, through particular methodology - lots of free direct presentation, strong focalisation and so on. If I wrote bland omnisicent "John opened the door" narration I wouldn't have any problem reading the same. I also don't get that problem when I'm writing an essay or journalism - often another writer will kick me up a gear in terms of my own writing. I actually steal a hell of a lot of devices and phrases from other writers, and reappropriate them. If I didn't read voraciously I wouldn't have any style of my own, because your own style is just an amalgamation of your tastes and influences. Which is sort of my larger point here - if you're not continually updating and expanding those things, it's difficult to develop. |
Hunter S. Thompson will seep into my prose, more typical of Stephen Ambrose, when I'm not reading anyone, than I'd like. But that's because of his reputation. Stephen King, which I'll read for the occasional shared "literary" experience with my girlfriend, completely screws my writing over for some reason that I think has to do with him attempting to cover a monumental amount of ground while being absolutely bored with his subject by the time he's painted himself into a corner.
Disclaimer: My girlfriend is a much more prolific reader than I am and Stephen King, in no way, reflects even a small margin of her tastes in authors.
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
Also, when I'm gearing up to write something I'll immerse myself in a lot of similar material to get me in the mood. That involves reading other books, watching films, listening to music, going to certain places and soaking up the ambience. I like to read other works that have tackled similar themes or have utilised similar devices to what I have in mind. |
How I'm relating to what you're speaking to, here, has to do with what I brought up earlier in the thread about how I'm listening to a lot of '60's and '70's music. There's an oldies station I'll listen to when I'm picking up my girlfriend from work that I've been listening to from the perspective of investigating a trend (I don't really have a proper term for it since it's just a personal observation I've made) in music that seemed to be occurring with how well all of the instrumentation related to phrasing that seems more complex. There seems to be a trend of cohesion building from the 50's, 60's, & 70's between all of the individual tracks for each particular song that almost seems lost, in the eighties, when there seemed to be a rejection of cohesive track elements. That lack of cohesion tended to favor a nearly quantized, untethered, and spare arrangement that, while still musically related, was constructed more as a utilitarian music bed for vocals.
Where more of the hook was shouldered by multiple instruments in the 70's, in the Eighties, the hook was even reduced to a single instrument and its complexity was similarly restrained. The Doobie Brothers and BG's, for instance, let their hooks shine in the harmonies of their chorus in songs like "You're Still the One" and "More than a Woman", but in Soft Cell's, "Tainted Love" that identifying signature was reduced to two quarter notes propelling a harmonically resonant sign wave unisoned with its more extensive (but equally simplistic) bass-line.
But this isn't really an immersion process that's specific to one track as much as it's a fascination with particular aspects I like to explore. I got quite sick a while back and wasn't up for much except watching Apocalypse Now Redux. I think I watched the film a total of four times, once all the way through with Coppola narrating his way through it. The bass-line in Superstition at 5:24 (marked up on sound-cloud) is literally stolen from the scenes right before the boat lands and pads from another song were inspired by the choir work.
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
I'm going to be totally open here - I don't read as much as I'd like to, and I certainly don't keep up with current literature. I don't think it's nearly as important, because literature is positively glacial compared to music in terms of movements and techniques, but I still think I should read more. It's funny that I was having this discussion with a friend recently - she is an aspiring musician and spends a lot of time recording demos in her bedroom. She listens to, buys and knows far less music than me, but she buys and reads a hell of a lot more books than me. When she gets stressed and wants to escape into a headspace she'll pick up a book, but when she asked me I do the same I said I'm much more likely to put an album on. |
There's times when I need to hit that "reset" button. I'll listen to anything, at that point, and that seems to help gain perspective. If I want to kill any creative urge, for the rest of the day, I'll listen to my own work. Then, for whatever reasons, all bets are off for me getting into any kind of creative swing. It's almost a familiarity breeding contempt, issue. I'll instantly relate what I've done to some facet of what I'm doing and hear an irksome redundancy that may otherwise work, but just isn't cutting it in light of recent listening. If I try something new, it's instantaneously related to something I've already done.
When I need to get out of my head, entirely, listening to other people's work with an analytic ear is the best bet. Unlike you or your friend, I don't really have an activity completely divorced from my primary interest. Even when doing other things, outside of music, I like to have something on in the background.
More to your point, however, you seem to be speaking to a necessity to keep abreast of current trends, opposing letting aspects of style ossify within the era they were contrived and perhaps even inspired by. That's where I'm a little weary of new influences. There are some current dance pieces I do study but, again, a lot of it has to do with emulating technical rather than artistic aspects, such as how certain elements are mixed. It's still artistic, I suppose, but with less of a prominence than what I want the audience to consider. If I'm paying attention to current trends then it's with an ear toward keeping my study of "Afternoon Delight" or "Muskrat Love" relevant to today's music than to borrow exclusively from today's artists.
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
In a way, this whole debate is a by-proxy examination of my own limitations as an artist. I think there's this trap that when you make any art form your craft you risk losing that essential interaction with it as a fan, and that causes all sorts of problems. I certainly don't consider myself the complete artist, and I've got my own struggles with productivity and inspiration. |
This is why I think the DJ/Producers, here, tend to fashion some of the best work. If there's a way to have your cake and eat it too, as a producer, fitting track B into what's playing out allows for that close exploration of production anatomy on the "fan" level. If I could be doing it, now, I would be.
I make that claim, very much from limited personal experience. It's not that I was a better producer when I had turntables, but there was something fundamental to hearing the combination of tracks occurring that lent itself to learning the ropes of the producing process. To that end, I also think you have a point. I think I would capitalize greatly from having both device and a current library, today.
It is entirely too easy to become bogged down in technical novelty and develop something to excess or neglect some other part, which can kill any number of things that would ultimately make a track playable. Just as easily, I think, a good idea can be overthrown by trying to remain too faithful to current trends. It's a peculiarly balanced, self-serving myopia that occurs (for me anyway) between the conscious mind and the DAW. In the beginning, I can see people moving to a new song but, at that early phase, I'm still hearing all the possibilities not yet fleshed out. More and more, decisions get made and while I can wind up with a track that I like, it no longer fits my original context for it and what's worse is that it's losing its attraction to me. What I should do, at that point, is put it away for a little while and start on something new but that stands against an ethos I came up with to solve a previous bad habit of having a bunch of unfinished tracks. One could argue that now I have a few mostly finished ones.
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
So I might not have much to contribute in terms of production talk, but in issues of creativity, inspiration and the relationship between external influences and your own output, I've got a lateral perspective. If more of the producers in this thread actually came back with answers like yours we might have a good discussion going here. Instead there's a whole battalion of over-sensitive wankers bleating because "music discussion" is happening, and it's raising a whole bunch of uncomfortable implications never encountered in a thread about side-chaining or compression. |
To be fair, I'm a little inoculated. I've also had a chance to think about what you said in your critique of my work. Not because there's some inherent weakness it has that I don't want exposed but more because, in the ideal world, it shouldn't need to be defended. I'm well aware of the ego-centric absurdity in the last clause.
You were fairly blunt, making known that its intent seemed indiscernible; even indistinguishable. To my mind, the intent should be some tacit theme which, although apparent, requires no remark to illustrate its presence. At the time I think I explained it away as an autistic realization, and while that may partly hold true, I'll say that for Superstition, at least, I was putting down a lot of frustration with things that were going on, in my life. I'd just lost two weeks worth of work on one song because the 64-bit installation of Sonar started having major issues with bit-bridge. I'd quit a job in such disgust, I can scarcely recall being more angry in the past five years. Musically, I was just frustrated in every area. The title came from the fact that I started that job on Friday, the 13th, which was the same day my girlfriend brought home two black cats.
A good song is like a good joke. Neither should be endured with an explanation. Above everything else you've said, to include my low-end being a joke and that you wondered why I even bothered with a bass-line in Superstition, that was probably the biggest insult - not that all my drama should have been evident but simply that it should have stood on its own. There's not much left to be sensitive about.
___________________
Now with extra singles!
my old stuff, not quite up to snuff - but I still dig it - UPDATED 9/23/2012
|
