Slashdot Mirror
Unrefined "Musician" Gains a Global Audience
Carl Bialik from WSJ writes "An unskilled musician performed a catchy pop instrumental for more than one million YouTube users even though he can't play a lick of drums or piano. The 22-year-old Norwegian's tool was stop-motion video, WSJ.com reports. From the article: 'To make "Amateur," Mr. Gjertsen recorded each analog beat and note one by one on video. He transferred the sounds from each video clip into audio files, which he could rearrange with the Fruity Loops sound-editing program — the same software he's used to create his all-digital music in the past. After organizing the sound files into the right order, Mr. Gjertsen reconstructed the pattern with the original video files. In the final product, he insists, nothing about his performance was digitally enhanced. "You have the original sounds from the video," he says.'"
That's essentially the concept of IDM; taking sounds from different sources that shouldn't work in any coherent sense and making them come together musically. This doesn't even go that far, sampling's been around for years. Also, "musician" refers not only to those who can play musical instruments, but also to those who compose musical works. He fits the criteria, as far as I can tell.
I think that's his point. That the 'musician' in much of today's recorded music is actually the producer/editor and not the person you hear singing/playing the notes that make up the music. The music is the editing, the editing is the music.
I am not a crackpot.
If someone submitted the link to this video a month ago when it first appeared on blogs and Digg etc it wouldn't have been accepted as a story on Slashdot. Funny how the Wall Street Journal's description of the video, spare interview, and short backstory showcasing their world-class investigative journalism (the same that doggedly followed the Enron debacle) makes this YouTube clip a legitimate story to post on Slashdot's front page.
I'm not complaining about it being here, or complaining that the Wall Street Journal submits its own stuff. Just funny how a random link becomes legitimate, that's all.
The Rise and Fall of Online Community
This kid really is awesome. His editing skills are unreal.
Check out his MySpace page. He has other material apparently.
"No doubt one may quote history to support any cause, as the devil quotes scripture." - Learned Hand
"Unskilled musician" yes. "Unskilled video editor" I think not.
"Unskilled musician" no.
"Unskilled performer" yes. "Unskilled composer" I think not.
A few months and who knows?
The man is skilled. Skilled at sampling and editing. He's not, however, a skilled musician.
I'm sorry, you're mistaken.
The only things your argument establishes is that he is not a talented drummer or pianist. A musician is someone who makes music, and for the purposes of defining the term, I couldn't give a shit how it's made.
The Richard D. James Album by Aphex Twin contains, in my opinion, some of the most beautiful "music" made in the last decade using techniques very similar, in principle, to the ones this guy is using. I'm thrilled to see that new tools are allowing different people to become musicians in brand new ways.
He is unskilled musician.
I have always relied on the definition of music as it was taught to me by my first college music professor: "Music is sounds and silence organised in time".
As far as I'm concerned this guy is very skilled at organising sounds and silence in time. Ergo, he's a skilled musician. He's just not a skilled instrumentalist.
-----
PGP Key ID 0xCB8FF658
Agreed. That's a pretty standard Baroque chord progression, and anyone familiar with Bach will spot the harmonic minor touches immediately. The guy may not be able to play the piano, but he certainly knows music.
-----
PGP Key ID 0xCB8FF658
He's not a pianist or a drummer, that's for sure, but he's a hell of a musician. In that he makes music. That doesn't imply any skill at any particular instrument, although in this case, I think it's quite arguable that the computer is his instrument.
Although new instruments have had a history of being rejected by more conventional instrument players whenever they're introduced, I would have hoped that we'd moved beyond that now. (Did you know what harpsicord players thought of the piano when it was first introduced? It wasn't flattering, I'll bet.) Keyboards, synthesizers, samplers, drum machines, and other electronic devices are all valid tools for a musician to use. For that matter, so are 55-gallon drums and PVC pipe, at the other end of the spectrum.
This guy made music; therefore he is a musician. The fact that you think that 'anybody' could do this is irrelevant; everybody isn't doing this, or it wouldn't be notable and other people wouldn't be listening to it. Acting haughty because he doesn't have conventional instrumental skills is ridiculous.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
In case you haven't realized it yet, not everything posted on /. is earth-shattering news. This video was neat. I enjoyed watching it. I bet he enjoyed making it. All is well with the world. Relax.
I disagree with just about everyone in this thread re: definition of musician vs. composer vs. editor etc., but I'm replying to you because I feel that this point of view is particularly damaging to good, original, modern music, and it's acceptance by a wider audience.
No one, other than academics who over intellectualize most music, really cares whether there is a 12-tone row in a piece of music. Why would you expect one to show up in a song by Aphex Twin? Would it make it a better piece of music? Aperiodic rhythms? Who cares?
Music is judged by the vast majority of people in subjective, opinionated terms. Arguing that someone should justify the use of sampling in music by citing an unknown, and in most people's opinion unlistenable (though innovative), composer is ridiculous. I appreciate those on the vanguard like Stockhausen for pushing boundaries and bringing new ideas to the table, but that doesn't necessarily make what they do 'good' music in a conventional (i.e. layman's) sense.
You sound like a pompous asshole. I guess what bothers me most is the tone of superiority that is expressed through statements like yours and by most people who hold similar opinions, and the insinuation that if someone disagrees they are stupid and wrong. It does nothing to encourage communication and exchange of ideas, and everything to turn people off of the fringe completely.
I disagree with what you're saying simply because it's wrong--this guy obviously grasps rhythm, melody and harmony; what you're claiming is ludicrous--but since 30 other people have written in to tell you that, I'd just like to point out that the standard by which any art should be judged is whether it's new, interesting, different, thought-provoking and/or aesthetically pleasing. I found this video to be at least four of those. If playing instruments well enables you to achieve that, that's good, but it's not really an end unto itself, artistically speaking. The world is full of extremely well-trained musicians who do nothing but play other peoples' work all day long and haven't a creative bone in their body. To me that's boring. Why do we need more of that? This guy is doing something fresh and innovative, and he deserves credit for it.
I think there is a world market for maybe five personal web logs.
How many of you clowns pooh-poohing this guy's composition because it's "just editing" would bee messing your drawers in awe if the music in question was (say) the original 1963 theme to Doctor Who? You know, the one Delia Derbyshire composed and "recorded" by physically cutting and splicing (in some cases) individual notes recorded on magnetic tape?
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.