Arbaz,
I think I'm going to go with you on this one. If someone wants to think they've got the bead on what it takes to be a "pro" by the equipment or methods they are using and anyone who is doing it some other way is an amateur....oh well. Or that in the final analysis it is the stamp of approval by a live audience to judge whether we are real or fake, or the work is good or bad.
I think in both cases, the perspective of making music however for the sheer pleasure of the sound is lost.
Success and professionalism and muscianship is a state of mind the rest of this stuff is mere judgemental mumbo jumbo to make one feel better than the next, by what baggage they are carrying.
Me, I'm making music guilt free...if someone wants to say, oh I don't respect your work because you use an arranger instead of a workstation, or you don't scratch out a tune note by note for every different part, well that's their hang up, not mine. I'm not making music to impress them anyway, that's what adolescents do.
Terry

[This message has been edited by Jocko (edited 11-09-2001).]

Jupiter

Hang in there - I think I know where you might be coming from in trying to use the strengths of a workstation and arranger - and it is without a doubt that these instruments are moving closer together - or they wouldn't be putting so many full accompaniment patches on all these so called work stations. Creativity is often inspired by having a template in front of you to save time and therefore energy for the project. Now our templates are getting more sophisticated. Hats off to your dad for encouraging you to play the piano as an instrument. A good grounding in keyboard technique and two hand complexities should certainly enhance your ability to use the modern tools in arrangers and workstations.

The way that people use arrangers for the most part is why they call them "arrangers" and not "writers". They seem to have alot in common with guys in the production studio who choose from alot of different tracks and takes for the final cut. Is this making music? Sure? Is it the same as playing the music? Not too sure about that. Is it important - probably not.

Terry seems completely right about one thing - and that is we can never forget that the primary beneficiary of our music is our own selves - and I have always told people that I believe this is the highest and best use of music. sound for its own sake. On the other hand - as soon as we put our music out for public consumption - we open ourselves to scrutiny on alot of levels besides just personal taste - and that includes all the historical standards by which music is evaluated - melody, harmony, complexity, diversity, sonority, rhythmic interest, mood stability, voice leading, nuance, musical humor, quality of flow, use of repetition and motif, chord quality, individuality, creativity, balance.

Accomplished musicians like your father who made little or no use of modern plug and play accompaniments - can be admired for their successes without thinking they have the corner on what music is. On the other hand - musicians who rely on these new tools to put out music for other than personal enjoyment - have a tougher road to acceptance - which is proportional to just how 'canned' it all sounds. Playing live - the challenge is all the greater.

I'd like to think that arranger keyboards will rise to the challenge - and that musicians from all walks of life will find them usable.

regards
Mike

Mike,
Good thoughts.
One thing I always think about as inspiration for me...re: the public scrutiny
VanGough.....1 painting to his brother, was he less of a master. The impressionists were barred from the salon of painters, because what they were doing, wasn't really painting.
If one judges the success of a musician and their work by commercial success, including public scrutiny and acceptance....I'm sad to say that most all who post an all the forums combined, are doomed to failure, if that is to be the criteria, because in reality other than minor bouts of gigging, very few make it to the big time.
I think the other thing about judging that way, take a look at some of the main stream acts that are out there, I'm not so sure I would call them talented great musicians, to me more like packaged, marketed products rather than pro musicians.
I think it is interesting the criteria you laid forth for judging others work and while I don't disagree, I think that's the way one musician judges another on a technical level. The vast majority of the public would not have a clue as to what you are talking about. If you asked them well, why is that such a great tune do you think...uh I don't know man it's got a good beat and I like the way the dude wails on the guitar.
Never under estimate the buying taste of the public.
You are absoultely right though, if we put our work out in public, we are asking to be critisized about it. Isn't that sad that others don't just accept and support the effort, especially our own fellow struggling musicians.
Isn't that what a forum is really supposed to be about helping and supporting each other regardless of how we make our music, as opposed to a heirarchy of princes and paupers, that play top me. At least that's what I thought they were supposed to be, not a place of superiority complexes.
Terry

Hi Terry

Interesting condundrum - striking a balance between pleasing ourselves and struttin our stuff!!! Forums - somewhat like playing music for the public - involve putting our opinions and ideas out for consumption. I believe people can be supportive of each other's effort to be a musician without finding a whole lot of heartwarming things to say about another's approach. While excellence is obviously in no way measured by commercial success - (it's impossible to overestimate the vulgarity in consumer tastes and unbelievable how much percussive/rhythmic emphasis has robbed modern music of its soul) - it doesn't seem appropriate that artistic expression be devoid of criteria for excellence either. Without standards of excellence, it is difficult to envision how or why we would encourage young promising musicians to be 'all they can be' - after all - there is some beautiful but difficult music out there.
I would like to see everyone learning how to play some kind of instrument. And for them to be told that their own enjoyment is a high level of achievement. Just like listening to a CD should bring you enjoyment. The 'arranger' has a little of both. It's kind of part live musician - part recorded musician(s). Nobody's in charge of deciding whether or not it is music.

regards
Mike

Mike,
I think you and I have finally reached mid ground and can agree with each other.
I certainly hope no offense was taken with the other posts, as none was meant.
One thing that I find very fascinating about we musicians is this....we spend months if not years in solitude, practicing our chops and all else that goes with it and then have to go in public and bare are fragile egos and souls, to gain validation for our work.
An interesting dichotomy indeed,
Terry

Too mucho words for me, at least now(Saturday evening).


Krix

PS Is it difficult to be a new Mozart? DS

jupiter 5----thanks for reply---but can't an arranger with a sequencer do anything that a workstation can do,except detailed sound editing? I love the idea of having style sections to work with but most sound so lifeless. what struck me about the fantom is it sounds so cool. the drums do not sound like they are played by a drummer thats half asleep! however,like most drum machines,there are no intos and endings.only arrangers seem to provide intros and endings.

Just a thought..I wonder if Mozart were alive and comosing today if he would scoff at " arrangers" or "workstations". I think a lot of folks are trained to believe that the old way or the "hard way" is always the better way, but I disagree at least in part with that notion. ( Read on...I encourage learning your instrument ) Times change and so does technology, and there is nothing wrong with taking advantage of that. Those of us who are "natural" keyboard or piano players just happen to be fortunate in that our instruments of choice happen to be the ones that midi is built around. These are today's tools and that is just what they are..tools, not a substitute for a dedicated keyboard player that should prevent him / her from learning the art of musicianship. Too often I saw the same mentality being displayed in other areas of life..my example.." I'm not going to use that nail gun.. real carpenters use a hammer". Guess what.. I've heard that more than once and those are usually the kinds of guys that get left way behind in today's technological world.

Having said that, I also strongly believe that if piano, synth, or organ is going to be your instrument of choice, not giving even the least thought to what others think of you, but it is only to your benefit to learn to play it properly without any arranger or accompaniment features. Learn the basics, learn to read music, practice scales and timing drills, listen to the techniques and styles of master players, because later on down the road it actually does help you even IF all you will be doing is composing in midi.

AJ