Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: Can Digital Music Replace Most Instrumental Musicians?
deviated_prevert writes "Most instrumental music used today in television commercials, background sounds and themes even on the majority of produced shows comes from completely digital composers who produce the product through digitized instrument samples. This has almost eliminated the need for real human instrumental musicians. For many listeners this makes no difference, as such music is essentially background in nature and does not need to have a true musical interaction with a listening audience at all. The same thing applies to the waves of digital music produced for things like raves. To quote one observer at the Globe and Mail 'So now we know why Deadmau5 and Daft Punk wear helmets when they perform. Everybody is digging the music, but no one is dancing. It is a sad development; the headgear of the maestros is there to mask their tears.' Will the live performance of instrumental musicians also become a thing of the past, or will there continue to be a real need for it? Purely instrumental groups like Booker T and the MGs, as well as solo performers like Herbie Hancock or John McLaughlin, seem not to take the spotlight as they once did. It is apparent that unless someone with a young fresh face is singing, today's producers will not attempt to seriously promote them. Regardless of how great today's instrumentalists are musically, there no longer seems to be a market for real musicianship. Even great performing classical musicians and ensembles are becoming scarcer due to faster and cheaper digital music production."
You aren't going to replace a jazz player with a sampler. Getting rid of concert performers for media production is just economics.
"So now we know why Deadmau5 and Daft Punk wear helmets when they perform. Everybody is digging the music, but no one is dancing."
Have you seen those concerts? Maybe it ain't the Charleston, but those kids are certainly groovin to the beat.
"It is a sad development; the headgear of the maestros is there to mask their tears."
Somehow, I think they have no trouble sleeping on their large piles of money each night.
I'm guessing he's never been to one of the aforementioned performer's party since he's talking out of his ass.
Comedy shows on TV have used canned laughter for decades, but nobody would say that it beats the experience of sitting in an auditorium live, with a great comedian on stage. The better TV shows will continue to have real music played by real musicians, and we'll all continue to get a better musical experience by going to the local concert hall, church, or bar.
This is really about Big Music losing its stranglehold on deciding who the big stars will be.
An article by a digital musician I read recently claimed that although digital synthesis can approach the quality of a real orchestra, it's extremely time-consuming to shape every note to fit the mood and context of that note.
If you factor in the time and effort to "carve" the note to sufficient quality, it's not economical compared to a smaller orchestra, because experienced musicians do the same in real time, with 1 practice and 2 takes on average. The performing group gets it done in about an hour, while diddling a synth rendering can take weeks. Even though it's one dude or so, it's a LOT of one dude.
Plus, you risk "ear burn-out" from so many replays such that you cannot recognize quality anymore. One has to switch between projects and styles to keep their ears fresh, delaying the finished product.
Maybe the editing software eventually will get better and the computer can assist with more natural "guesses" to get closer to expectations to reduce customization, but at this stage if you want quality performances, synthesis is not fully competitive.
Table-ized A.I.
Seriously, a good band playing out on thr edge of their comfort zone and creating something magical, or the power of a full orchestra with the complexity of the sound reverbarating around a concert hall.... is going to be replaced with some samples?
And art galleries have died because you can see digital photos on the net?
No doubt it has and will be tried again and again, but this is like saying you won't ever need to have sex again because off the pron on the internet.
Depends on the purpose. For just listening to background music, or the radio, probably. Session musicians? Maybe, but live is better. For events in which live musicians add to the prestige, no. And in between?
If I'm gong to pay money to see the The Typewriter, Prokofiev's Romeo and Juliet, or Tchaikovsky's 1812 Overture, I want a real symphony orchestra (and preferably real canons for the 1812). No digital music will replace someone like Victor Borge (RIP).
Marching bands can't really be replaced with digital music. Certainly the British and Russians would never do it for their parades. (Are bagpipes even compatible with digital music? ;) . )
There is no replacing a cappella music, such as this, or a barbershop quartets. Many other forms of music would suffer, maybe even be pointless, if they were done without live performers. They are often much of the fun.
Digital is handy for composing though even if you will perform live later.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
Ironic that Herbie Hancock was used as an example. It wasn't so long ago that Mr Hancock would have been the poster's point made with synths vs real piano players. Musicians make the music. The instruments are just tools. There has always been, and will always be crappy mass produced pablum. Likewise, there will always be musicians who rise above the rest. The tools they use influence the sound, but the artist creates the experience.
Now, get off my lawn!
Read the fine title :) That's why the it refers to most music. People like singing because it's an extension of talking, our primary mode of communication. We can differentiate between 1000s of voices in the same accent and therefore singing has more 'personality' than a guitar or piano tone.
Rodrigo y Gabriela belong to the sphere of virtuostic rock music where the personality of the instrument (and playing) is much more pronounced. This makes them an exception. Most of the songs on X-Factor/Idol could be played back instrumentally, using synthesised instruments, and most of the audience couldn't tell.
I do think the need for live instrumental musicians will never disappear. This is the whole point of a concert, to get worse sound quality in exchange for direct communication with the artist*. If the artist is just pushing the play button that disappears. Further, many people enjoy the expression of playing an instrument themselves, and they will always want to hear others do the same.
* Or the hype of a crowd, so maybe DJs will prove me to be wrong.
Jeeeezus how many times have I heard this. Go and listen to a piano-violin duo playing Souvenir d'un Lieu Cher then come back and tell me someone with a pair of turntables messing around with SOMEONE ELSE'S MUSIC is a musician. I'm sure they'd like to think they are but until they pick up an instrument, electronic or otherwise, that is actually capable of creating notes they are not.
The stuff you are talking about is fine for people who don't really want musicianship. And good luck to them. Each to his own.
No, your children are not the special ones. Nor are your pets.
"Ask Slashdot: Can mass production replace most atisanal handicrafters?"
So say we all
Is a car ever going to replace a running athlete?
There. That's how silly this question really is.
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.