Why do we want to put our names on other people's records?

[Kenny Gioia]

Why do we want to make records that sound like other records?

I don't get it. Haven't those records already been made?

What joy do we get from merely emulating someone else's art?

What preamp did they use on Dark Side of the Moon?

What board did they mix "Back in Black" on?

How do I get the guitar amp sound from XXXXX?

Why do we care? Why don't we just create art without referencing other art?

Or is it that we just want to put our names on other people's records?

[baslotto]

Are you saying from a music point of view or mixing?
I use reference tracks like guidelines, so I can reset my ears.

I remember commenting "this song sounds very much like RadioHead", never "this mix sounds very much like CLA", but maybe I'm not too experienced to notice.

[FilmNMusicman]

The best musicians and their music was made with the influence of the ones who came before them....

[JP11]

Originally Posted by FilmNMusicman

The best musicians and their music was made with the influence of the ones who came before them....

Right...and we want to do what they did...

[JP11]

One thing that's sort of funny about that is that if you reference something old, there is something perhaps too obvious about the influence and you are considered very unoriginal...

but if you copy something that is newer and fresher, you are considered current and happening and people probably won't really consider you unoriginal even though you could very well be completely unoriginal, and the other person who's referencing the old stuff may actually be more original....if that makes any sense...

on the other hand, some people can completely rip off ancient stuff and get away with it, like Amy Winehouse or even Bruno Mars, for example...

[baslotto]

I still don't get the question from a mixing point of view.

[JP11]

Mixing-wise, some obvious things would be stuff like sample replacement or autotune...I don't think many if any are doing these things to be original or create an original sound...they are most likely doing it because that's the sound, man...same with compression, brick wall limiting...even digital recording itself...why does most everything on the charts have the same (god awful) sound?

gear-wise, just hang out on this board....do you like the Acme preamp...I do I do! Me too!

[baslotto]

Yeah, I think Kenny needs a break from GS!

[Delphino]

Good things deserves, will and should be reused. Be it melodies, phrases, gear , methods, colors, xyz...

[noiseflaw]

A few reasons:

1. Insecurity
2. Admiration
3. Laziness
4. Lack of imagination
5. Learning the recording art

[psycho_monkey]

Because that's what our clients ask for? today I have to reference a Roxette track.....wouldn't be my choice, but they're paying me!

[Barish]

Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia

Why do we want to make records that sound like other records?

I don't get it. Haven't those records already been made?

What joy do we get from merely emulating someone else's art?

What preamp did they use on Dark Side of the Moon?

What board did they mix "Back in Black" on?

How do I get the guitar amp sound from XXXXX?

Why do we care? Why don't we just create art without referencing other art?

Or is it that we just want to put our names on other people's records?

I remember me making this point a number of years back. I can't remember what forum it was.

It had gone over people's heads, like it is now.

The best reply you will be getting to this, Kenny, will be in the line of "errrr... this amp goes to eleven."

B.

[swafford]

Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia

Why don't we just create art without referencing other art?

lol.

[Unclenny]

Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia

Why don't we just create art without referencing other art?

Hmmm.......

From a music creation standpoint, all that other art from all those years past has become an intrinsic part of my creative process. I have assimilated it and now my music reflects it.

Doesn't that apply to the mixing game as well?

I mean.....do you really have to think about what was used on all that classic stuff after all this time or has it just become a part of your process?

[noiseflaw]

Originally Posted by Barish

The best reply you will be getting to this, Kenny, will be in the line of "errrr... this amp goes to eleven."

B.

Ha ha!

[unitymusic]

I was in a book store the other day and they had a quote printed out by paul gauguin that said "art is either plagiarism or revolution"; I guess not everyone is a revolutionary.

[Kenny Gioia]

Originally Posted by baslotto

Are you saying from a music point of view or mixing?

I think it can be both.

For instance, I might add a sample to a snare drum while I'm mixing, but I never reference other records to get "that" snare drum sound. I want one that works with "this" song.

From a creative point of view, I'm not suggesting we re-think how to write music. Verses. Choruses. Even Genres make sense. We do build on what came before. So I'm not suggesting that we should all start over. But on this particular forum, there seems to be a lot of "how do I get this sound" and it confuses me. Why not create your own? Why not create a sound that works well with the parts that you wrote? Rather than sound like a well established previous record?

[Jim Williams]

What do you mean "We", Kimosavi?

[sage691]

Because 99.9% of people who make records are not artists, but merely "entertainers" obsessed with being in the spotlight and pleasing the largest crowd.

Also, because the pathetic brain dead gestapo of bean counters who dominate this biz wouldn't have it any other way.

It's really as simple as that.

Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia

Why do we want to make records that sound like other records?

I don't get it. Haven't those records already been made?

What joy do we get from merely emulating someone else's art?

What preamp did they use on Dark Side of the Moon?

What board did they mix "Back in Black" on?

How do I get the guitar amp sound from XXXXX?

Why do we care? Why don't we just create art without referencing other art?

Or is it that we just want to put our names on other people's records?

[Musiclab]

In a perfect world you learn from what came before and make it your own. As a musician, you listen and absorb from everyone, and hopefully you don't try to do exactly what someone did before, although in certain genre's like the blues
there is a "book" of licks that are somewhat stock to the genre, the idea is to start from that and make it your own, Hendrix, Clapton, Page [on record]
and every great except for maybe Allan Holdsworth, took from what came before and made it their own.
As far as in the record making process, I agree completely with you Kenny, there are always things to learn and sometimes it's a good exercise if you hear something cool, to try and figure out what they did, BUT come up with your own sounds that are right for the track you're working on. I have a client who does take downs of records, it seems sometimes he can't come up with an idea if it didn't come from someplace else that he references. It's too bad

[sage691]

Originally Posted by FilmNMusicman

The best musicians and their music was made with the influence of the ones who came before them....

That's merely your opinion.

IME 99.9% of people who think that way create the most boring, uninspired, soul-less music; usually they are people who can't even play music without reading it on a sheet in front of them.

Yes, influences are important -- but you either have an individual, unique soul or you do not. IME that is by far the most important thing, and something that cannot be learned or copied from previous artists.

[broadscotch]

Originally Posted by Barish

I remember me making this point a number of years back. I can't remember what forum it was.

It had gone over people's heads, like it is now.

The best reply you will be getting to this, Kenny, will be in the line of "errrr... this amp goes to eleven."

B.

Pfff, please.

How can you breathe up there on that high horse?

This is absurd.

How many records have you made with a 57 and a Hiwatt? Does that suddenly make you a poser? Cause that combos been working long before you and your lofty "people won't get it" attitude.

Sometimes you guys get a little full of yourselves.

Dennis Sands has mixed every film he's done for the last 15 years or so on the same CS3000. Is he not making art because he's using what he used last time?

A previously used signal path makes you not capable of creating art?

I'm still waiting for this mythical "it goes to 11 response"...

People are smarter and more willing to adapt to change than we give ourselves credit for.

[T1M0N]

Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia

From a creative point of view, I'm not suggesting we re-think how to write music. Verses. Choruses. Even Genres make sense. We do build on what came before. So I'm not suggesting that we should all start over. But on this particular forum, there seems to be a lot of "how do I get this sound" and it confuses me. Why not create your own? Why not create a sound that works well with the parts that you wrote? Rather than sound like a well established previous record?

Purposive creative use of the tools you have (be it your instrument, your recording equipment or whatever you want to use in a creative manner) reqires a deep understanding of your tools. Otherwise it's random (might also lead to something useful or even great). If I had never learned scales on my guitar and never analysed the playing of great guitarists or wondered how they achive something I wouldn't be able to play like I am (neither original nor cover music). The same goes for mixers, producers, composers, painters and so on.
I highly respect your knowledge and abilities and I mean this in no insulting way, but I doubt that you never listened to a record, heard something that you really liked and tried to reproduce it, and if it is only to learn and expand your abilities. Of course the right question would not be "how did they do that" but "how can I do that with my existing possibilities" and also the learning effect is much higher when you find it out by yourself. But nobody can find out everything on his own. There are always mentors, books, friends or educational institutions that will guide you or answer your questions. And more and more that list of helpers is expanded with the internet and especially with forums.
I think it is justified to analyse and even to attempt to duplicate (for educational reasons :-)). As well as it is to ask for help if you are stuck. And I guess nobody who is successful at what he is doing can claim that he never did that.

[Barish]

Originally Posted by broadscotch

Pfff, please.

How can you breathe up there on that high horse?

This is absurd.

How many records have you made with a 57 and a Hiwatt? Does that suddenly make you a poser? Cause that combos been working long before you and your lofty "people won't get it" attitude.

Sometimes you guys get a little full of yourselves.

Dennis Sands has mixed every film he's done for the last 15 years or so on the same CS3000. Is he not making art because he's using what he used last time?

A previously used signal path makes you not capable of creating art?

I'm still waiting for this mythical "it goes to 11 response"...

People are smarter and more willing to adapt to change than we give ourselves credit for.

Actually I breathe quite comfortably up here. No horseshit smell like you get down there all the time.

You have missed the point, buddy. Hence my statement "went over heads".

Reread the whole lot.


B.

[noeqplease]

@ Kenny:

You are welcome to do whatever you want.
If you make your own music, it can sound like whatever you want it to.

However,if your Paying Client wants to sound like someone else...
then it is your job to make them happy.

That is kinda why we engineers keep referencing records that are popular.

Cheers

[theblue1]

Originally Posted by JP11

One thing that's sort of funny about that is that if you reference something old, there is something perhaps too obvious about the influence and you are considered very unoriginal...

but if you copy something that is newer and fresher, you are considered current and happening and people probably won't really consider you unoriginal even though you could very well be completely unoriginal, and the other person who's referencing the old stuff may actually be more original....if that makes any sense...

on the other hand, some people can completely rip off ancient stuff and get away with it, like Amy Winehouse or even Bruno Mars, for example...

I'm not sure how much people set out to repackage the past; to be sure, some do.

But I think the success of such a venture -- and the cool factor (or lack thereof) derived from such a venture -- greatly depends on what you're borrowing from, what's going on in the broader cultural milieu (there are times when the audience is hungry for novelty and other times when they want musical comfort food), and, more than a little, how far back you're reaching.

I would say that if you, yourself, are very near the bleeding edge, you may get away with heavy contemporary influences. However, if you're smack in the middle of the contemporary norm, no one is likely to even notice you or care.

Conversely, if you reach back to a stylistic milieu far enough in the past, and you do it with a certain artfulness that avoids simple mimicry of past styles, and you've got good foundational materials to work with (a good song and a good grip on the style and production elements you want to work with), all of a sudden, you're hip again. Maybe.

[88fingerz]

Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia

Why do we want to make records that sound like other records?

I don't get it. Haven't those records already been made?

What joy do we get from merely emulating someone else's art?

What preamp did they use on Dark Side of the Moon?

What board did they mix "Back in Black" on?

How do I get the guitar amp sound from XXXXX?

Why do we care? Why don't we just create art without referencing other art?

Or is it that we just want to put our names on other people's records?

lay off da sauce...

[Kenny Gioia]

Originally Posted by sage691

Because 99.9% of people who make records are not artists, but merely "entertainers" obsessed with being in the spotlight and pleasing the largest crowd.

Also, because the pathetic brain dead gestapo of bean counters who dominate this biz wouldn't have it any other way.

It's really as simple as that.

I think you may have nailed it my friend.

[Kenny Gioia]

Originally Posted by Musiclab

As far as in the record making process, I agree completely with you Kenny, there are always things to learn and sometimes it's a good exercise if you hear something cool, to try and figure out what they did, BUT come up with your own sounds that are right for the track you're working on. I have a client who does take downs of records, it seems sometimes he can't come up with an idea if it didn't come from someplace else that he references. It's too bad

I've had a few of those as well. Very un-fun!!!

Originally Posted by Musiclab

In a perfect world you learn from what came before and make it your own. As a musician, you listen and absorb from everyone, and hopefully you don't try to do exactly what someone did before, although in certain genre's like the blues
there is a "book" of licks that are somewhat stock to the genre, the idea is to start from that and make it your own, Hendrix, Clapton, Page [on record]
and every great except for maybe Allan Holdsworth, took from what came before and made it their own.

I don't think we disagree about this at all.

[Kenny Gioia]

Originally Posted by sage691

That's merely your opinion.

IME 99.9% of people who think that way create the most boring, uninspired, soul-less music; usually they are people who can't even play music without reading it on a sheet in front of them.

Yes, influences are important -- but you either have an individual, unique soul or you do not. IME that is by far the most important thing, and something that cannot be learned or copied from previous artists.

And it comes from what the end game is.

Do you want to be famous? Admired? Want chicks?

Or do you have this burning thing in you that has to get out. Whether it's heard and admired or not.