Too much influence?

[eyeswithoutaface]

Mark's first ever techno record thread really has me thinking, and this is something ive toyed with in my mind for a few years now....

can influence be a bad thing? of course everyone needs a starting point, something that sparks a fire inside and pushes you to strive to create the sounds you want, but can too much influence be a bad thing? Can wishing to be part of something so much, or to be up there alongside those you admire, blind you from your ultimate goals?

i personally think so. I think over the past say 7, 8 years this has become more and more apparent, with more and more *insert fave artists name here* a-likes appearing all the time. Dont get me wrong, im not saying this is a bad thing, because some people do go on to find a sound they can genuinely call their own, and use this as a spring board to carving their own niche in the scene, but obviously, alot dont.

i make a point of listening to not much techno at all at home, depending on my mood too, because i find myself getting so excited by my fave artists, and sometimes i find my output that week or day or whatever is affected by this, albeit subconciously, and sometimes its not apparent until ive wasted a few hours on something that whilst technically stands up, artistically comes too close to the line of sounding like people i admire

on the flipside, i find that when i havent listened to techno or electronic music as a whole in a while at home, and im in the studio, i feel this great sense of freedom, because im not thinking of such and such a record or artist and my subconcious is, seemingly, free to do as it pleases, and this is when i find i do my most original and personally gratifiying work, and these have (with the exception of one release) gone on to be my best records and personally the records that i am most proud off

im rambling on here a bit i guess but im just looking for some opinions on this, as im guessing some of you must have had this same experience at some point or another

[crime]

I used to be under an assumption that I was being a bit of a Cristian Vogel plagurist, which I've decided was false, I would have loved to have been, but was never good enough :)

Sounding exclusively like your favourite artist shows a bit of a lack of imagination to me, there's nothing worse than sounding like a second rate version of someone else, unfortunately there are so many instances of it these days it makes me question the reason why these people are making music, because they'd be pretty naive if they really thought they were making any contribution to the advancement of music..

I mean, ok, maybe if you like one track by someone, and want more stuff like that because they didin't do anything else like it, maybe, but these trax will always sound inferior to the original idea..

original ideas rule, plagurism or plain copying sucks and is pointless in my mind...

I don't think there's anything wrong with influences as such, it's what you do with it at the end of the day...
Having said that, I know of one producer who refuses to listen to any techno apart from what he's made, and he makes some of the most original stuff I've ever heard.. so maybe there's something in that....

[clubsynthetic]

be inspired but do not aspire to be anyone. I think if one can harness being able to listen to and identify the techniques that their favourite artist is using to create such a good sound then they should because it is all a learning curve.

If one doesn't listen to the artists at some point then how will they ever gain technical knowledge (not about electronics and box's but the music itself)?

I find myself doing the same thing as you Eyes. But the longer i smoke weed and forget about what i've just listened to the more i can make tunes my own,, and hopefully, with - as cheesy as it sounds - a better understanding about music and how to convey my imagination and develop it artisticly.

But generally, if i like my fav artists tune i'll just play it on the decks and enjoy it - why would one need to go out and make another tune thats sounds like it???

[clubsynthetic]

oh and being original doesn't always mean good i think ;)

[dirty_bass]

It comes down to lack of diverse listening, as well as obsessive influence.
If all you listen to is the type of music you are making, then you won`t be learning much, as you are instantly putting yourself within boundaries and risk your music becoming nothing but pastiche.

[clubsynthetic]

yeah thats true. so if you want to make original music one should go and listen to things they don't like? lol

[dirty_bass]

Partly, yes.

Basically, no matter how much you "dislike" a type of music, if you are a producer and an artist, you will always learn something new from it.

And learning from other music rather than just one type will allow you to learn other techniques and skills, different rythms, different sounds, thus increasing your knowledge and skill bass allowing you to have more weapons in your arsenal when making your music of choice.

Or you can listen to one very narrow type of music and learn nothing more than how to sound just the same as someone else. In which case why not just buy their records and save yourself the time?

[clubsynthetic]

indeedy.

so for best results of your productions, listen to absolutely everything, or nothing.. so your not bias.

tis hard 'tho because most of the time i choose what i want to hear usually.

[BRADLEE]

Personally I'd have to say most of my influence in sound comes from Industrial musik.

[Little_Fella!]

Good call...

How to find that balance, as a producer, between listening to what is essentially your favourite style of music, and leaving it alone so that you can create what's coming out of you when you plonk yourself down in front of your monitors...:mmm:

I'm sure we all notice straight away, when we're composing, that a tune has taken on a particular vein and straight away think of how to steer it in a different direction... this is innovation:teach:

Having a sense of individualism in the first place is a key factor when constructing rhythms formed from your desire to create...:)

[Little_Fella!]

And learning from other music rather than just one type will allow you to learn other techniques and skills, different rythms, different sounds, thus increasing your knowledge and skill bass allowing you to have more weapons in your arsenal when making your music of choice.

Very true...

Having done this your level of creativity increases as you have a lot more variables and ideas that you can pull together, or harness in a way that can be utilised within the framework of the style you are creating...

This makes things all the more exciting which then feeds into the music you are making...:cool:

[dirty_bass]

I`ve learned more about making techno from other music, than I have techno.
Especially when it comes to interesting rythms.
I`ve been looking at indian rythms and some middle eastern stuff for odd tunings and such, great inspiration and it caused me to rethink my scales and use of polyrythms.
Listening to nothing but techno would never have given me that.

[The Overfiend]

I find before writing, I listen to a lot of Death Metal lately.
If not Metal some Old Old Jamiroquai, El-P and Diggin In the Crates Hip Hop.

[RDR]

Its an issue that really has its roots in the technology that we use. Digital replication in particular - an 808 kick drum sounds like another 808 kick drum but they dont sound EXACTLY the same do they.

It has bearing on the way in which bands such as rock bands play cover versions - now there is an argument that has been raging for years. And jaz musicians are more than happy to play a freeform version of mary had a little lamb that goes on for 20mins.

As someone else said - inspiration not aspiration. After all - inspiration leads to perspiration rather than aspiration leading to an insipid nation.

cheesy soundbite i know.
Mind you this is music and NOTHING is sacred.

Also - just to back up what DB said - (Praise bob) Diverse listening leads to diverse musical opporunities in the mind.

[Si the Sigh]

I agree with you 110% Scott.

This has been bothering me for ages as well, especially within the acid techno scene. The new comers, who should be bringing something fresh and new are just bringing more of the same in my honest opinion. Thats not a bad thing, because these producers tracks are solid, and extremely well produced, but may as well have been produced by a certain big name producer already.

[holotropik]

I feel that initially there is imitation
until such time as you learn to walk on your own....

[DannyBlack]

i dont think thee is such a thing as 'too much influence', its about how you interperate said influence and grow as unique. there is, i think, a very thin line between influence and Plagiarism.
perhaps 'Plagiarism' is too strong a word, but you know what i mean.

influence should be used as a growing tool, a point of reference, retrospective or otherwise. you learn from it then make something beautiful all of your own from what you have gained from your 'heroes'.

[eyeswithoutaface]

some quality replies here boys and girls nice one

[Martin Dust]

I don't think you mean influence at all, what you really mean is copying - there's a world of difference.

[eyeswithoutaface]

not at all, sorry mate but please dont TELL me what i really mean....

read it back through mate, im asking what peoples opinions are on the great old problem of over influence. To dismiss this is stupid, because its a problem everyone has faced at some point, wether they conciously are aware of this or not

im talking about being so into certain artists that naturally, without sitting down and CONSCIOUSLY copying said artist, you can notice similiarities in your work. I would say it happens more so when people are starting out in production than when they are established, but it certainly happens, and alot of people actually are aware that they do this and release everything they do regardless anyway.

it's human nature that if a person gets so excited and has such a passion for a certain sound, naturally at some point they are going to come close to sounding alot like their influences, at which point innovation and originality should, hopefully, take over

im simply asking peoples opinions on when this has happened to them, if its happened to them that is, what they were thinking when they realised this, which direction this pushed them in etc etc

i do think you've misunderstood my post there mate to be fair

[Martin Dust]

Not at all, there's a massive difference between influence and copying, what you are talking about is copying not influence.

[eyeswithoutaface]

im not mate seriously, i know the difference between influence and copying and i dont need it explaining

i was simply asking how people have dealt with the time when they've realised, if its happened that is, that they are letting their passion for other peoples work slip into their own SUBCONCIOUSLY

huge, huge difference to people sitting down and actually going "right, im going to do a blatent Surgeon-esque ep" or whatever

with the greatest respect i have for you mate, which i do, i'd rather people where posting in this thread if they are going to give opinions and not just tell me what im posting isnt what i mean thanks

[Martin Dust]

I know very well what you are saying, it's just that you don't seem to understand your own question. Call it what you want but copying fits a lot better than influence because at the end of the day that's actually what you are doing and even in the eyes of the law, it wouldn't be called "influence" - would it?

Or would you rather me just agree with you?

[DannyBlack]

like i said before, there is a thin line between influence and copying. but there is a line non the less. and Mr.withoutaface acknowleged that line and posed the question.

[Martin Dust]

like i said before, there is a thin line between influence and copying. but there is a line non the less. and Mr.withoutaface acknowleged that line and posed the question.

Very much so, but my arguement is that influence is, indeed, the wrong word to use in this case because that's not really what it is.

[DannyBlack]

ok, thats cool. but if influence is not the right word to use, what is?

[eyeswithoutaface]

mate seriously, come on, im a cocky bastard and even i wouldnt tell someone else they dont understand their own question. And this isnt about me at this present time with what im up to, i have my own mind musically and i know where im going and what i want out of my music

i totally get what u mean, but im not talking about that whatsoever.

I am asking people if they have had that moment when they've been in their studios working on tracks, presumably quite happily and content, when they've suddently realised what they are doing sounds suspiciously like one of their fave artists or particular records, and where do you go from there? Whats the next step?

I can admit this has happened to me when i started out, there's no shame whatsoever in it, everyone needs influence in practically everything they do unless they are someone genuinely original and groundbreaking. I remember a few times when ive been working on stuff and half a track throught its dawned on me that it is just toooooo similiar to a certain artist or record, and this, for me, was the point when i'd have to put my own personal ego and ambition to the side and rethink what i was doing. Like i say, no shame in this at all, because, again for me, it stems from a complete passion for certain artists music and what it has done for me and what it means to me

im not asking "how many of you sit down and actively copy your fave artists, and why, and how, and what do you do from there?"

i totally get your point and even agree to the extent that yes, it is technically copying, but the point of realisation wasnt reached through a concious effort to sound like something or someone else, but was merely your passion for certain music coming through TOOOO much, subconciously, and was only apparent at a point when several hours had been, effectively, wasted creating the music up to that point

Crime made a great point which backs it up entirely about his friend who refuses to listen to any other techno except his own output, and, in Mark's view certainly, creates some of the most original stuff he's heard, which to me summarises everything i mean

im not taking pot shots at anyone or anything like that, im simply asking the question can too much influence be a bad thing and why? What im not asking is "is copying a bad thing and why" because, quite clearly, that answer is already widely known. Or certainly should be

[eyeswithoutaface]

like i said before, there is a thin line between influence and copying. but there is a line non the less. and Mr.withoutaface acknowleged that line and posed the question.

exactamundo mate, the line is scarily thin at times, i was merely asking who has crossed this line, without knowing it until its too late

this is a great debate, and to me one of the best threads in here in a while, but i think the point that as humans, its easy to be over influenced by something or someone that you love without knowing it until its too late, in this case that being either when youve finished a track, halfway throught it, or, in alot of unfortunate cases, after youve pressed the tracks up to vinyl or released them digitally

[DannyBlack]

i absolutely agree dude. but i have to stick to my origional post on this, unless you are one of the get rich quick slags (best of euphoria etc etc) and just out and out copy whats popular at the time then it isnt possible to become over influenced.
you look up to your idols, you become inspired by what they do and you develope your own sound.
Granted you do the odd remix here and there but thats more a homage to the particular artist.

[eyeswithoutaface]

i absolutely agree dude. but i have to stick to my origional post on this, unless you are one of the get rich quick slags (best of euphoria etc etc) and just out and out copy whats popular at the time then it isnt possible to become over influenced.
you look up to your idols, you become inspired by what they do and you develope your own sound.
Granted you do the odd remix here and there but thats more a homage to the particular artist.

yeah but its just not that easy to develop your own sound straight off the mark, everyone needs a starting point, my point being, when does the starting point become the finish line? when does a person make the transistion (boom boom) into their own sound, if at all? How have people gone about this, conciously or subconciously?

nevermind anyway im obviously talking out of my arse :whoops:

[DannyBlack]

yeah but its just not that easy to develop your own sound straight off the mark, everyone needs a starting point, my point being, when does the starting point become the finish line? when does a person make the transistion (boom boom) into their own sound, if at all? How have people gone about this, conciously or subconciously?

nevermind anyway im obviously talking out of my arse :whoops:

no, no, no sorry mate, i get you! right it was me, i missed the point. you see im only really just starting out production wise so im not sure what is the cut off point and if indeed i do have a similar sound to anyone else.

i do record obscure sounds and polish em up. and i know that i read an article once that aphex twin guy (cant think of his name) puts microphones in blenders- recording the strange crushing sounds, this had me intregued so thats why i record EVERYTHING that makes a sound.

but like i said im only relatively new to all this, so i dont know what the cut off point is.

[eyeswithoutaface]

no, no, no sorry mate, i get you! right it was me, i missed the point. you see im only really just starting out production wise so im not sure what is the cut off point and if indeed i do have a similar sound to anyone else.

i do record obscure sounds and polish em up. and i know that i read an article once that aphex twin guy (cant think of his name) puts microphones in blenders- recording the strange crushing sounds, this had me intregued so thats why i record EVERYTHING that makes a sound.

but like i said im only relatively new to all this, so i dont know what the cut off point is.

eureka, that's what im saying mate! where is the point that people cut off? or have people even realised where that point is, where they break ouf of the cocoon as it were and into their own sound? or to the extreme, is anyone knowingly at that point but having trouble getting over it?

sounds to me your going the right way and being original, and im not being condascending here at all just because ive had a few releases incase that's how anyone is viewing this, because im learning every single day and i will be learning until the day i join the great big studio up in the sky

[Martin Dust]

This is why I felt you where asking the wrong question. First of all, it human nature to copy, it's how we learn to survive. So, if something has been re-enforced through repartition (learning your times tables for example) it's hardly surprising that it crops up in every day life. I don't think we are talking about influence or copying, copying although correct in the eyes of the law would suggest there was some intent, if there is no awareness then surely it would be coincidental.

[eyeswithoutaface]

This is why I felt you where asking the wrong question. First of all, it human nature to copy, it's how we learn to survive. So, if something has been re-enforced through repartition (learning your times tables for example) it's hardly surprising that it crops up in every day life. I don't think we are talking about influence or copying, copying although correct in the eyes of the law would suggest there was some intent, if there is no awareness then surely it would be coincidental.

i think were on the same wavelength now, it is indeed human nature to copy, my thread basically was saying where does a person draw the line, and what have peoples personal experiences been of this

[DannyBlack]

i think, those that are truly original cherish thier influences and as you said, never stop learning and striving to become the best in thier chosen field.

[The Overfiend]

i think, those that are truly original cherish thier influences and as you said, never stop learning and striving to become the best in thier chosen field.

Exactly

I think people realize they are regurgitating their idols when they make tracks that purvey unoriginal ideas, meaning I heard this exact sample in " 's" track so I am going to redo it and add my own flavor. Now in any artform you need to be learned technique, and method, it is the word style that is what needs to be unique, style is what makes someone stand out above and beyond the crowd, and style as in fashion, as in graffiti, as in music, goes in cycles, but it is not always the same.

[DannyBlack]

http://www.electric-circus.net/images/newsite/adverts/topic.gif

[dirty_bass]

The problem I see with techno, although this may just be the general state of most music in this climate is that the mainstream and commercial (of each genre) has fully entered the audience conciousness, via the ridiculous over marketing machine and profit drive we are subjected to, and therefore people as a rule are far less willing to take risks.
this has caused musical vanilla to spread further than ever, but it`s present in product design, fashion and most of the arts really these days.

I cherish my influences, and there is nothing wrong with that at all, but at the same time try to do what I can to not sound like them.

What would be nice is a newfound rebellion. A new Punk or Industrial movement, as it were, though only in ideology, not output.

[clubsynthetic]

Hmm..

...well for starters, ammo for innovating music production can be in the form of samples/sounds, music listening background, what physicial machines you are using and finally how to use them.

How to get to the innovation?.....experimentation i suppose.

Where do you draw the line on copying other people's work? Same samples; same basslines or rhythm patterns? Its a very personal question as everyone has their standards are vastly different.

If copying happens subconciously and you won't give up listening to your fav artists. then an artist must conciously look at how to make there music individual.

I think thats why drugs have a big part to play in triggering music creation, 'cos then your imagination isn't really limited to what your listeing to and you think outside the box.

[eyeswithoutaface]

Where do you draw the line on copying other people's work? Same samples; same basslines or rhythm patterns? Its a very personal question as everyone has their standards are vastly different.


without pointing out the obvious mate, that's what my thread is asking in the first place essentially, but im not talking about actively copying someones work, far from it. Im talking about what happens when a passion for something clouds rational judgement, thinking and a persons output. In this case the passion is for music, and a persons particular favourite artist, style, sound etc etc.

i should sincerely hope that no one conciously makes an effort to copy anyone, regardless of their standards. Copying is copying is copying, regardless of the the degree to which the copying runs into.

and its got nothing to do with drugs at all to be fair, i dont see a role that drugs can play in production on any level. Even something like getting stoned in the studio can impede progress and rational thinking, and 4 hours later your still sitting there stoned with the same loop playing. That's not innovation to me

[dirty_bass]

Well you have to ackowledge that some of the most creative and innovative music that has been made and recorded would probably never have happened if not for drugs.
opening your mind is one thing though
hammering your brain so you can barely operate equipment or getting to the state where inspiration only comes through drugs is a whole other problem.
I tend to think that drug music only entertains drug people, but that`s not always the case.

[The Overfiend]

Even something like getting stoned in the studio can impede progress and rational thinking, and 4 hours later your still sitting there stoned with the same loop playing. That's not innovation to me

Agreed, anything I have made when operating in that mind frame I have been quite embarassed about and have totally cut that aspect out of my life.
Due to health constraints I am now in a clean and sober prison called my body.

[eyeswithoutaface]

my bad, misunderstood the first part of your post there mate, and it wont let me edit for some reason...

but still stand firm on the drugs comment, i dont understand that at all, i actually feel a little sorry for anyone who needs drugs to trigger their musical creation/output

a person's imagination is alot more clear and healthier without an un-natural substance clouding it up, imo

[eyeswithoutaface]

Well you have to ackowledge that some of the most creative and innovative music that has been made and recorded would probably never have happened if not for drugs.
opening your mind is one thing though
hammering your brain so you can barely operate equipment or getting to the state where inspiration only comes through drugs is a whole other problem.
I tend to think that drug music only entertains drug people, but that`s not always the case.

well yeah, but i feel innovation is subjective, one mans turd and all that, and more often than not, when someone presents me with a piece of music that was made by someone on drugs, 99% of the time it sounds just that, music that's been made on drugs. Il use someone like Frank Zappa as an example, because im a huge fan of guitar music and non electronic music shall we say, and the amount of times people have said to me "oh Zappa is amazing, made his stuff off his face on acid" and what not, and ive just listened and heard not much except someone losing it on acid. But of course i know what you mean and im sure there are exceptions to the rule, i just dont personally think drugs are a good catalyst for creation, regardless of how many examples someone would put infront of me, as for me the amount of good music available that WASNT made by someone off thier head far out weights the amount of music that WAS made by someone off their head

for me anyway, like i say, its all pretty subjective

[eyeswithoutaface]

Agreed, anything I have made when operating in that mind frame I have been quite embarassed about and have totally cut that aspect out of my life.
Due to health constraints I am now in a clean and sober prison called my body.

yep same here mate now

had my fill of pretty much everything

[clubsynthetic]

for one, drugs make a vast difference to perception which is what innovation is all about isn't it. expanding imagination!! You don't need to be constantly under the influence to change you perseption forever!

But yes too many drugs incapacitate one's self. Look at Hendrix good and bad...

You either copy something already done or make it up in your imagination. simple. you copy or you don't - consiously or subconsiously.

and i ain't had my fill of drugs by a long shot so there.

so we can't listen to too much techno ro do drugs for our best chances of innovative music - where shalt we get oor ideas?

[eyeswithoutaface]

for one, drugs make a vast difference to perception which is what innovation is all about isn't it. expanding imagination!! You don't need to be constantly under the influence to change you perseption forever!

But yes too many drugs incapacitate one's self. Look at Hendrix good and bad...

You either copy something already done or make it up in your imagination. simple. you copy or you don't - consiously or subconsiously.

and i ain't had my fill of drugs by a long shot so there.

so we can't listen to too much techno ro do drugs for our best chances of innovative music - where shalt we get oor ideas?

chill out, no ones saying dont do drugs or listen to as much techno as you want, as influence affects different people in different ways. It's simply not as clear cut as that at all.

I know people who have never touched drugs in their whole life yet make absolutely beautiful, thought provoking music, just the same as i know people who get seriously walloped as often as they can and make their own brand of music too, but to me the first is 99% of the time the best.

its got nothing to do with how many drugs you've had or if you've had your fill of them either, no one suggested otherwise

and there are PLENTY of places to get ideas apart from techno or drugs, we live in a world totally full of inspiration.

i unfortunately lost my grandmother this year, and ive wrote a song about her. It has turned out to be the single most emotional and personal thing ive ever written, and i actually cant play it that often even on my own because it upsets me, but its also helped me come to terms with her loss. No drugs involved. No techno involved, just raw emotion

[clubsynthetic]

and yes it is all subjective. but generally people can tell good from shite whatever music genre they listen to.

i would say a way of judging the amount of innovation is your reaction to the particular music you are listing to and the reaction of everyone else listeing to it too. The more people surprised or interested in what seems to them to be a new groove, the more innovative no?

[clubsynthetic]

chill out, no ones saying dont do drugs or listen to as much techno as you want, as influence affects different people in different ways. It's simply not as clear cut as that at all.

I know people who have never touched drugs in their whole life yet make absolutely beautiful, thought provoking music, just the same as i know people who get seriously walloped as often as they can and make their own brand of music too, but to me the first is 99% of the time the best.

its got nothing to do with how many drugs you've had or if you've had your fill of them either, no one suggested otherwise

and there are PLENTY of places to get ideas apart from techno or drugs, we live in a world totally full of inspiration.

i unfortunately lost my grandmother this year, and ive wrote a song about her. It has turned out to be the single most emotional and personal thing ive ever written, and i actually cant play it that often even on my own because it upsets me, but its also helped me come to terms with her loss. No drugs involved. No techno involved, just raw emotion

I'm perfectly cool mate, just a crap joke.

[eyeswithoutaface]

and yes it is all subjective. but generally people can tell good from shite whatever music genre they listen to.

i would say a way of judging the amount of innovation is your reaction to the particular music you are listing to and the reaction of everyone else listeing to it too. The more people surprised or interested in what seems to them to be a new groove, the more innovative no?

you'd be suprised. I think techno as a whole is one of the best examples where 99% of the time, those who are being truely innovative get overlooked for the most popular artist at the time

[eyeswithoutaface]

I'm perfectly cool mate, just a crap joke.

no worries mate, little misunderstanding i think :cool:

[force]

and its got nothing to do with drugs at all to be fair, i dont see a role that drugs can play in production on any level.

I dunno, it didn't do the beatles any harm.

Although, i know what you mean about getting stoned and listening to the same loop for 4 hours! :ohdear:

[clubsynthetic]

you'd be suprised. I think techno as a whole is one of the best examples where 99% of the time, those who are being truely innovative get overlooked for the most popular artist at the time

Yeah thats true but do these people go straight for what they think or are they actually that shallow to listen to really good music and ignore it?

Personally i think alot of people just don't bother listening to what they don't know. what about the people who have had a listen, if its good they usually listen again i would think.

[clubsynthetic]

Although, i know what you mean about getting stoned and listening to the same loop for 4 hours! :ohdear:

personally i would call that reconnaissance ;)

[detfella]

well yeah, but i feel innovation is subjective, one mans turd and all that, and more often than not, when someone presents me with a piece of music that was made by someone on drugs, 99% of the time it sounds just that, music that's been made on drugs. Il use someone like Frank Zappa as an example, because im a huge fan of guitar music and non electronic music shall we say, and the amount of times people have said to me "oh Zappa is amazing, made his stuff off his face on acid" and what not, and ive just listened and heard not much except someone losing it on acid. But of course i know what you mean and im sure there are exceptions to the rule, i just dont personally think drugs are a good catalyst for creation, regardless of how many examples someone would put infront of me, as for me the amount of good music available that WASNT made by someone off thier head far out weights the amount of music that WAS made by someone off their head

for me anyway, like i say, its all pretty subjective

funny you should pick zappa because he didn't take drugs and actively campaigned drug-taking since the 60s. he wouldnt let band members take them on the road either!

good topic scott. agree with steve in that too much of 1 style stagnates the mind & body. i enjoy listening to as much music as possible from here there and everywhere, but this leaves one problem...no time to make music! it can be compared with knowledge once you know what is out there you can try & do different or build on it. if you dont know it already exsists you might repeat...thought i'd just have a splatter of words

[detfella]

oh i forgot to say, zappa rules!! love his music & lyrics. but i love fusion rock jazz blues stuff so that aint no big suprise!

[detfella]

haha

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohVpYt_S8lY

[eyeswithoutaface]

I dunno, it didn't do the beatles any harm.

Although, i know what you mean about getting stoned and listening to the same loop for 4 hours! :ohdear:

that's true, but they were doing perfectly alright before they got into their drug phase to be fair, and there is eternal debate as to wether or not their heavy foray into drugs and spiritualism contributed to their break up, so for some people drugs had a devastating effect on the beatles, but again its subjective, but still a fair point of course

but there is a difference between producing off your head and writing songs off your head, in the traditional sense. I mean, ive had nights where ive been tripping my head off, writing songs, with the mics running, and when ive listened back in the morning.... errr lets just say it got deleted from the 4 track haha

[eyeswithoutaface]

funny you should pick zappa because he didn't take drugs and actively campaigned drug-taking since the 60s. he wouldnt let band members take them on the road either!

good topic scott. agree with steve in that too much of 1 style stagnates the mind & body. i enjoy listening to as much music as possible from here there and everywhere, but this leaves one problem...no time to make music! it can be compared with knowledge once you know what is out there you can try & do different or build on it. if you dont know it already exsists you might repeat...thought i'd just have a splatter of words

well i wouldnt know as gospel, with zappa ive only ever gone on what people have recommended and told me stories about, ive never been able to get into him or researched him or what he was about, but i think this is a bit of an on going debate as alot of people seem to be convinced he was a space cadet, whilst it is documented in various places that he was as you say anti drugs

either way its tosh to me ;)

[eyeswithoutaface]

Yeah thats true but do these people go straight for what they think or are they actually that shallow to listen to really good music and ignore it?

Personally i think alot of people just don't bother listening to what they don't know. what about the people who have had a listen, if its good they usually listen again i would think.

in my experience, alot of people sometimes dont actually understand certain music when they hear it, and this breeds a certain level of embarrasment or pressure to fit in and they ultimately end up plumping for something that whilst liking at the same time, they can actually talk about and understand. Which is fine, its horses for courses as they say

shaping up into a lovely thread this, top draw lads

[detfella]

well i wouldnt know as gospel, with zappa ive only ever gone on what people have recommended and told me stories about, ive never been able to get into him or researched him or what he was about, but i think this is a bit of an on going debate as alot of people seem to be convinced he was a space cadet, whilst it is documented in various places that he was as you say anti drugs

either way its tosh to me ;)

now peter tosh...

[The Overfiend]

Me and Brad's foray into Spiritualism has actually made the output more meaningful.

[clubsynthetic]

i got over that when i started listening to techno. listen to everything i try to. and ask myself "how does this make me feel?"

i can't imagine people who would be listening to techno (who probably had to have there eyes opened to it) listeing to someone's choon and overlooking them just because they are not a name. I would see them just avoiding the tune altogether, like me on juno i can't listen to everything so i go with what i know and whats related usually beacuse i don't have the time.

[clubsynthetic]

Me and Brad's foray into Spiritualism has actually made the output more meaningful.

lol. i feel complete

[A.P.]

I just write what comes out.

Dont think about it, just do it and stop sitting their in a daze with your finger up your arse...haha!

[eyeswithoutaface]

i got over that when i started listening to techno. listen to everything i try to. and ask myself "how does this make me feel?"

i can't imagine people who would be listening to techno (who probably had to have there eyes opened to it) listeing to someone's choon and overlooking them just because they are not a name. I would see them just avoiding the tune altogether, like me on juno i can't listen to everything so i go with what i know and whats related usually beacuse i don't have the time.

this happens more so in techno than ANY other genre i know off in my experience. I've literaly had people tell me in clubs they only listen to so and so's output or such and such a persons records, believe me mate its sad but too true

[clubsynthetic]

so then their opinions on innovation don't count for shit to me if they ain't heard it.

nice tracks btw eyes

[eyeswithoutaface]

cheers mate, muchos appreciation :)

[BRADLEE]

lol. i feel complete

Who are you to judge what influences my music or anyone else?

[dirty_bass]

I think what I meant by ,my reference to drugs, is that you can`t discount them altogether, nor say they are the only way.
People get inspiration from different places, and have their muses in different areas.
I won`t entirely close my mind to any method, regardless of wether I agree with it or not, and I`ll certainly try anything I haven`t tried before as if you close doors then possible paths of learning are also closed.
I`ve purposfully put myself into various extreme emotional states to see what creative energies can be got from these places, as well as various states of inebriation, meditation and such.
Admittedly my artistic output isn`t restricted to music alone, I paint and write also, so I`m into exploring the mind and spirit for explorative and creative expression anyway.

But I think to totally discount any particular method is to essentially be a little closed minded Scot.
Art is a process of the soul and mind, and everyone has their methods and varying output, which is what makes it all so beautiful, and although we may not understand the methods or output of another artist or artists it doesn`t mean we can`t appreciate what they do and how they do it.

[clubsynthetic]

Who are you to judge what influences my music or anyone else?

I'm not judging anyones influencies. and i'm not being sarchastic either.



But I think to totally discount any particular method is to essentially be a little closed minded Scot

Its all very noble and its cool in my book dude.

here man, i listen to all sorts and don't think twice what stigma it has. But no other ones taste is like ones own and other people's opinions can't change that. I actually think its good chat here. I'm just refereing to people's opinions on my music tastes. if all they've got to say is shite them i'm sorry i don't wanna listen to theres

[dirty_bass]

I'm not judging anyones influencies. and i'm not being sarchastic either.




Its all very noble and its cool in my book dude.

here man, i listen to all sorts and don't think twice what stigma it has. But no other ones taste is like ones own and other people's opinions can't change that. I actually think its good chat here. I'm just refereing to people's opinions on my music tastes. if all they've got to say is shite them i'm sorry i don't wanna listen to theres

I was replying more to scot there dude.
but I agree, your tastes are your tastes.

[RDR]

So we assume the following:


Output does not equal input?

[BRADLEE]

All we can really assume i what we hear isnt it? I mean, we can't really know what one was thinking when they were making something right?

Either way no hard feelings....

It's ALL ABOUT THE MUSIC RIGHT?

[The Overfiend]

It's all about the image Brad.

[BRADLEE]

It's all about the image Brad.

I have no recollection of any such occurances senator.

[The Overfiend]

Should the defendant not have any further statements he may be dismissed from the stand.

[dirty_bass]

It`s all about hype and nepotism really.
But we can live in hope.

[eyeswithoutaface]

some seriously great views in here chaps

tea and biscuits for all

[The Overfiend]

I don't like biscuits, pass me the Earl Grey.

Or as Busta Rhymes so eloquently put it.
"Forget the Moet n*gga and pass the Cisco!"

[holotropik]

As for attaining higher consciousness through drugs, the mystic warned that "it is one thing to unloosen the girders of the mind, and quite another to get the rivets tightened up again, and unless one is prepared to go through life rattling like a cheap motor-car it is unwise to seek this method of development, speedy and effectual though it is."

....??

[dirty_bass]

Well I think creativity can be self destructive, and most artists with or without drugs tend to live through extreme emotion.
I think the bolts are already loose in most cases.
But that`s the price you pay for the muse.

[Jay Pace]

Copying is just a derogratory way of interpreting influence.

Any work could be praised for being influenced by X or slated for being an attempt to copy X. Comes down to whoever is doing the copying/influencing in the first place. If they set out to copy its a copy. If they set out to do something and ended up making what sounded like a copy its influence. A question of intent, and totally subjective and dependent on the listeners interpretation of the artists work.

Starting out, being young you have limited experience and influence. You haven't seen that many people play live, you've listened to a certain amount of albums and you haven't seen scenes rise and fall. So if you get into a new sound, which is defined to you by Mr X and Mr Y and you start making stuff its hardly your fault if it ends up sounding like a cross between Mr X and Mr Y. Sure, some artists emerge from nowhere and become the musical zeitgeist but this is the exception rather than the norm.

I'd say you need to keep your potential pool of influencers as broad as possible, this will make your music personal and unique to you - your output being the sum of your influences + whatever else goes into your creativity and output.

That said I think even people with very limited listening repetoire can produce incredibly original stuff. Some people are just very creative that way. Personally I don't think I am, I'm more reliant on my influences. So depends on the person.

[Little_Fella!]

Copying is just a derogratory way of interpreting influence.

Any work could be praised for being influenced by X or slated for being an attempt to copy X. Comes down to whoever is doing the copying/influencing in the first place. A question of intent, and totally subjective and dependent on the listeners interpretation of the artists work.

I'd say you need to keep your potential pool of influencers as broad as possible, this will make your music personal and unique to you - your output being the sum of your influences + whatever else goes into your creativity and output.

A very moot point...

A producer who has had limited knowledge of what has gone before may produce an absolutely wicked tune - only to be told that it sounds like Mills back in '95, or whatever...:whoops:

What does he/she do? Attempt to release the track, only to be shot down in flames as a mimmick...? bin it and say a lesson has been learnt..? try to manipulate the elements into something different so that the hard work put in wasn't a total waste of time..?

As time marches on it becomes more of a minefield for producers to try to infuse the influences they have experienced into a definitive sound that they can genuinely call their own, which has a sense of unique-ness and innovation....:mmm:

[clubsynthetic]

yes maybe so, fella, but innovation can never be completely deminish 'tho eh? It will be a minefield, but innonvation will become more and more refined i think.

Its nice when other people feel your music, whether other people like it or not. all artists can do is create what they feel an hope lots of people (or in the future less people or even someone) feel thier music. The reward is in what they make for themselves and not for others really.

[Little_Fella!]

yes maybe so, fella, but innovation can never be completely deminish 'tho eh? It will be a minefield, but innonvation will become more and more refined i think.

The reward is in what they make for themselves and not for others really.

It will have to...

I am optomistic that innovaion will thrive as time goes on... we have a lot more tools available to us that are becoming ever more advanced these days... it is quite amazing how you can manipulate sounds... which is a very healthy breeding ground for individual creativity...:cool:

So....

How do you help rebuild a whole scene if the reward is purely on a personal level , and not for others?

I understand your point, because if you don't like the tune you've just created then lawdy, what is the point...:whoops:

That's your starting point, but surely there has to be some purpose that drives your creativity....:ruquestion: :ruquestion: :ruquestion:

[Little_Fella!]

As for attaining higher consciousness through drugs, the mystic warned that "it is one thing to unloosen the girders of the mind, and quite another to get the rivets tightened up again, and unless one is prepared to go through life rattling like a cheap motor-car it is unwise to seek this method of development, speedy and effectual though it is."

....??

Heh heh...:;

I like this analogy... I think you have to have been there, loosening them girders - or rather, I feel I have benefited anyways...

To do anything about it though, I think you have to take a step back n try tightening them up again...

Nice one...:cheese:

[dirty_bass]

It will have to...

I am optomistic that innovaion will thrive as time goes on... we have a lot more tools available to us that are becoming ever more advanced these days... it is quite amazing how you can manipulate sounds... which is a very healthy breeding ground for individual creativity...:

Well I agree, I only wish more techno producers made more use of the huge pallete available to them.
Rather than just bunging in another rack of nokicks samples, a few hasty "nasty" synth presets and compressing it all to buggery.

[RDR]

Well I think creativity can be self destructive, and most artists with or without drugs tend to live through extreme emotion.
I think the bolts are already loose in most cases.
But that`s the price you pay for the muse.

I agree in part with that, high emotion does breed artist creativity.

However i dont think that its something that is NEEDED for artists to function - there have been plenty of stable, happy and mentally secure artists who have created enormous works of art both in music and the visual arts.

What perhaps is most important is the idea. Which kinda leads to another interesting point - Machine driven music can be just that. Randomisation techniques without setting base parameters. Are these randomisation techniques part of the human idea or do they side step that. sure we bring them into play when randomising a mad synth line but is that the same as launching the program or even turning on the computer. i.e. is it part of the process of operating a machine or is it part of the creative process to let the machine do the thinking for us, just giving it some boundaries and letting it do its business according to a lawless environment.

anyone understand what im on about?

BTW point 2 has got nothing to do with point 1. or has it....

[RDR]

innonvation will become more and more refined i think.

isnt that an oxymoron?

[Ritzi Lee]

This topic looks like an influence from my last topic. (where almost nobody replied)

Producers have to understand the game again of making techno music. It's about what you can create with sound. Throw away all your used samples and loops and all that shit. If you are talking about influences, it's particularly those samples, because they are taken from existing tracks. Especially the loops.

And what's left: An empty space.
If you really are a techno producer, on this point you are able to create your own interpretation of (let's take something) thunder and lightning.

[RDR]

This topic looks like an influence from my last topic. (where almost nobody replied)

Producers have to understand the game again of making techno music. It's about what you can create with sound. Throw away all your used samples and loops and all that shit. If you are talking about influences, it's particularly those samples, because they are taken from existing tracks. Especially the loops.

And what's left: An empty space.
If you really are a techno producer, on this point you are able to create your own interpretation of (let's take something) thunder and lightning.

Right then
so who's been copying off ritzi?

:laughing:

Like the idea of throwing it all away though!

[dirty_bass]

I agree in part with that, high emotion does breed artist creativity.

However i dont think that its something that is NEEDED for artists to function - there have been plenty of stable, happy and mentally secure artists who have created enormous works of art both in music and the visual arts.

What perhaps is most important is the idea. Which kinda leads to another interesting point - Machine driven music can be just that. Randomisation techniques without setting base parameters. Are these randomisation techniques part of the human idea or do they side step that. sure we bring them into play when randomising a mad synth line but is that the same as launching the program or even turning on the computer. i.e. is it part of the process of operating a machine or is it part of the creative process to let the machine do the thinking for us, just giving it some boundaries and letting it do its business according to a lawless environment.

anyone understand what im on about?

BTW point 2 has got nothing to do with point 1. or has it....

I can`t think of many stable, happy, mentally secure artists who were anything more than working hacks.

Randomisation techniques, yeuch, not for me, I just won`t let the machine generate any of my music, I want to make it, not leave it to the damn PC.

[RDR]

I can`t think of many stable, happy, mentally secure artists who were anything more than working hacks.

Randomisation techniques, yeuch, not for me, I just won`t let the machine generate any of my music, I want to make it, not leave it to the damn PC.

Happy and mentally secure?

How about you?

I love randomisation, i enjoy being a shepherd to my machine to its own conclusions. And of course it leads to another question - how does random influence your own self initiated actions?

[Ritzi Lee]

Right then
so who's been copying off ritzi?

:laughing:

Like the idea of throwing it all away though!

thanks m8.
sometimes i know i aint that stupid. ;)

[BloodStar]

yeah randomization, i quite like it lately. machine can sometimes create patterns i would never think about.. really enjoying it,.

[The Overfiend]

so using loops is biting off influences, lmao
yeah and using screwdrivers to build a building is so last century
and a plunger for a clogged toilet, primitive
tools are tools no matter who you are
like saying samples in hip hop are wack, are you kidding me?

[eyeswithoutaface]

This topic looks like an influence from my last topic. (where almost nobody replied)

Producers have to understand the game again of making techno music. It's about what you can create with sound. Throw away all your used samples and loops and all that shit. If you are talking about influences, it's particularly those samples, because they are taken from existing tracks. Especially the loops.

And what's left: An empty space.
If you really are a techno producer, on this point you are able to create your own interpretation of (let's take something) thunder and lightning.

to be fair, i couldnt understand what you were getting at with your thread Ritzi mate and i think that's why not many people replied, i couldnt grasp what you were trying to say and i can only presume others didnt also. It doesnt matter who started what thread, as long as the discussion is going on in the first place, which it is here, so its all cool

[clubsynthetic]

isnt that an oxymoron?

I'm not sure if its contradictory to itself.. (that's an oxymoron isn't it?)


I agree with dirty bass about the artists and hacks thing. There are degrees of how high one's emotion is when making music, but usually the best artistic shit comes from, say, someone wanting to cut there ear off..

Yip, the best music comes from the people who love it most and have no agenda but to create it for it's own exsitance and for nothing else.

I think that comes part and parcel.

As for randomisation....good for ideas and learning, bad for final expression of the artist i think, as its not what they wanted to convey it's what a computer did and it takes no effort to think about. Less organic - which is the beauty thats lost!

But to be honest if one is bringing it all together in a masterpiece of music then i don't give a ****.

[The Overfiend]

Dis is how it looks when ju know me an Brad is in de estudio, cockroaches.

http://www.healthbolt.net/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/scarface-photo-xl-scarface-6235696.jpg

[BRADLEE]

Dis is how it looks when ju know me an Brad is in de estudio, cockroaches.

http://www.healthbolt.net/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/scarface-photo-xl-scarface-6235696.jpg

:laughing:

Accept for me it's a bit of this....
http://botev1912.com/Jack_Daniels_Whiskey.jpg

and a little bit of this....

http://www.drownedinsound.com/images/4788.jpg

:;

[RDR]

I'm not sure if its contradictory to itself.. (that's an oxymoron isn't it?)


I agree with dirty bass about the artists and hacks thing. There are degrees of how high one's emotion is when making music, but usually the best artistic shit comes from, say, someone wanting to cut there ear off..


i know its being picky but there a few visual artists i know who dont rate van gogh. and at the time he wasnt rated at all.

which brings up another interesting point about art/music and vitality.

Death and the artist?

An artists work suddenly gets better after death... why?

there were contemporaries of V.G who were better trained, better eye fro colour and far more prolific - what made him so great.. surely not just the golden raito, or an eye fro colour.

he certainly didnt have a ear for the critics...:laughing:

[The Overfiend]

The Aristocrats

[clubsynthetic]

ok then. Like MJ. He had the funk

[The Overfiend]

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g139/jdmTRDriderpr/nutswinger1dy.gif

[Ritzi Lee]

to be fair, i couldnt understand what you were getting at with your thread Ritzi mate and i think that's why not many people replied, i couldnt grasp what you were trying to say and i can only presume others didnt also. It doesnt matter who started what thread, as long as the discussion is going on in the first place, which it is here, so its all cool

Well Tony it's really simple. You understand it or you don't. :)
But with so many techno minded people over here, I at least expected all to understand what I was talking about.

[eyeswithoutaface]

well no not really, you said it yourself not many people replied, so im guessing alot of people didnt get what you were saying mate. I certainly understood the your thoughts in your thread, i just didnt understand what conclusion you were trying to come too with your thoughts. I think maybe there would of been more replies if you'd posed the thread as an actual question grammatically too maybe

and its scott matey ;)

[RDR]

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g139/jdmTRDriderpr/nutswinger1dy.gif

Eh?

[The Overfiend]

Well Tony it's really simple. You understand it or you don't. :)
But with so many techno minded people over here, I at least expected all to understand what I was talking about.

I'm Tony so what are you talking about?

[Ritzi Lee]

well no not really, you said it yourself not many people replied, so im guessing alot of people didnt get what you were saying mate. I certainly understood the your thoughts in your thread, i just didnt understand what conclusion you were trying to come too with your thoughts. I think maybe there would of been more replies if you'd posed the thread as an actual question grammatically too maybe

and its scott matey ;)

Shit it was Scott!
haha I obviously missed that one... my bad. :D

Actually the thread already started with the main question "What do you like about techno music?". And then "What am I missing in the new sound?".
But it seems the questions where a bit cryptical. Steve was the only one who really got the point.

[The Overfiend]

Steve is pretty cryptic so I can see how he was able to assess your points.

Since you work with them, I would love to see what Orlando Voorn and Juan thought of modern day techno, all aspects of it. Schranz included.

[Ritzi Lee]

Steve is pretty cryptic so I can see how he was able to assess your points.

Since you work with them, I would love to see what Orlando Voorn and Juan thought of modern day techno, all aspects of it. Schranz included.

Interesting. I could ask them to get their thoughts on this one. By the way, it's all for the benefit of development.

[module]

mmm..

nah.. everybody starts somewhere & trying to emulate those you admire is a great thing..

every great band started out trying to be like their heroes..

its inevitible that you will emulate the sound of those you admire.. from singer songwriters in the Dylan mould, to hard techno djs wanting to be better & faster than Rush..



check this out - i feel nothin for Kratwerk.. jus dont do a thing for me.. but my love of artists like NIN & Jeff Mills (waaay back when..) well, THEY were influenced by Kraftwerk, and as they influence me, i indirectly have a Kraftwerk influence..

i think its a necessary evil in finding your own sound.. i defy anyone to pick up a guitar or sampler & make sumthin totally individual straight of the bat...

like or not, we are influenced by EVRYTHING we hear, regardless of our like or disdain for it..

one of my biggest influences in music is the soundtrak to Assault On Precint 13.. go figure :D

[The Overfiend]

I prefer the Soundtrack to Krush Groove.

[massplanck]

I bet hermits make the best music.

[RDR]

I bet hermits make the best music.

hermans hermits :laughing:

[dirty_bass]

i know its being picky but there a few visual artists i know who dont rate van gogh. and at the time he wasnt rated at all.

which brings up another interesting point about art/music and vitality.

Death and the artist?

An artists work suddenly gets better after death... why?

there were contemporaries of V.G who were better trained, better eye fro colour and far more prolific - what made him so great.. surely not just the golden raito, or an eye fro colour.

he certainly didnt have a ear for the critics...:laughing:

Have you ever seen a Van Gogh?
Takes on a whole new meaning when you see the paint on the canvass.
The texture in the brushwork, you can see the madness and schizofrenia within the brushwork, and trace it as it influences him more as the years go on.
I wasn`t a fan at all until I saw it all up close.
Apparently the vortices within the brushwork of his later works follow the patterns very closely, of turbulance within an air body, according to scientists, which is in itself interesting. His mind was literally, a storm.

anyway, it is being picky just choosing him.
Most great artists have been unhinged in some way. I won`t compile a list.

And no Chris, I wouldn`t say I`m mentally stable, or happy all the time, I do suffer from bipolar somewhat, although I`ve learned to ride it, rather than use chems to numb it, and it provides me with great and powerful creative energy. (not that I consider myself to be a great artist, although I do aspire).

[dirty_bass]

one of my biggest influences in music is the soundtrak to Assault On Precint 13.. go figure :D

I`m assuming that you are talking about the original film, and not the hollywood assphuck of recent years.
Man, that is one of Carpenters best soundtrack, I remember I liked it so much, I learned how to play it for my music class performance back in school when I was about 11.

[RDR]

Have you ever seen a Van Gogh?
Takes on a whole new meaning when you see the paint on the canvass.
The texture in the brushwork, you can see the madness and schizofrenia within the brushwork, and trace it as it influences him more as the years go on.
I wasn`t a fan at all until I saw it all up close.
Apparently the vortices within the brushwork of his later works follow the patterns very closely, of turbulance within an air body, according to scientists, which is in itself interesting. His mind was literally, a storm.

anyway, it is being picky just choosing him.
Most great artists have been unhinged in some way. I won`t compile a list.

And no Chris, I wouldn`t say I`m mentally stable, or happy all the time, I do suffer from bipolar somewhat, although I`ve learned to ride it, rather than use chems to numb it, and it provides me with great and powerful creative energy. (not that I consider myself to be a great artist, although I do aspire).

Ok so im barking up the wrong tree here, but i stand by my point - you dont have to be mad to be a great artist and TBh it bugs me that the two seem to go hand in hand.

as for mental problems - im joking man, thats what i do - didnt mean to offend you, god knows ive got my own problems.

[module]

I`m assuming that you are talking about the original film, and not the hollywood assphuck of recent years.
Man, that is one of Carpenters best soundtrack, I remember I liked it so much, I learned how to play it for my music class performance back in school when I was about 11.

the very fact that u need clearence on what version i am referring to.. ;)

seriously though.. yeah. its Carpenters version of Rio Grande that i have been extremely influenced by... a sound track consisting of jus 3 ideas that can have such substance is beyond my comprehension...

AND... the only reason it was done the way it was, is because he ran out of budget.. he wrote, played, recorded, produced & mixed the whole thing himself in about 3 days cos thats all he could afford.. 3 days studio time & no musicians or engineers.. and its amazing.. the tension.. the emotion.. its jus flawless & timeless & the first time i seen that film at about 9 years old i was blown away.. totally stunned.. and to this day, i still get goosebumps watching that film..


'there are no heroes anymore.. only men who follow orders'

take MI:III and stuff it right up your Holywood arse Cruise :D

[tocsin]

Mark's first ever techno record thread really has me thinking, and this is something ive toyed with in my mind for a few years now....

can influence be a bad thing? of course everyone needs a starting point, something that sparks a fire inside and pushes you to strive to create the sounds you want, but can too much influence be a bad thing? Can wishing to be part of something so much, or to be up there alongside those you admire, blind you from your ultimate goals?

Interesting. In regards to your question, perhaps it's semantics? There's a big difference between "influence" and "copying." I don't really disagree with what you're saying. But, I think the problem lies in not so much the level of influence itself, but from where influence is taken. If one is only influenced by techno artists when making techno music, it's going to get bland. For the style I like and am most comfortable with, I couldn't really be more out of the loop with it right now as to who the big guys are. I can't even really say I have a favorite techno artist anymore. I don't make enough cash to buy records and I'm not a downloader. So, unless I'm getting a mix or a track from someone or I'm writing it myself, I've no idea what's going on. In one way, this has been absolutely great for me. My influence is coming more from my direct environment than other music, which works fine for what I like to do. But, it's also been bad in that my output is much more chaotic, both in sound and in times where I can be creative, since there isn't something as direct as other music to kind of ground me. However, it's doesn't really matter since I've always done this for fun and for myself first and foremost. Never cared about sharing a stage with any of my favorite artists. I got to do it a couple times at one point though and it wasn't through sounding like them. And now, well, I wouldn't know where to start. The ambient sounds and weight of where I live, however, will provide enough inspiration for the rest of my life. I don't know if other artists' influences can blind anyone from their goals though. Depends what they are. If the ultimate goal is to just sound like someone else and be alongside them, then one wasn't really blinded if that's what they achieve. If that's not what one wants to do, there's just too much room to **** with sound nowadays for one to not be able to put their own mark on the variation of a simple format.

[force]

Interesting. In regards to your question, perhaps it's semantics? There's a big difference between "influence" and "copying." I don't really disagree with what you're saying. But, I think the problem lies in not so much the level of influence itself, but from where influence is taken. If one is only influenced by techno artists when making techno music, it's going to get bland. For the style I like and am most comfortable with, I couldn't really be more out of the loop with it right now as to who the big guys are. I can't even really say I have a favorite techno artist anymore. I don't make enough cash to buy records and I'm not a downloader. So, unless I'm getting a mix or a track from someone or I'm writing it myself, I've no idea what's going on. In one way, this has been absolutely great for me. My influence is coming more from my direct environment than other music, which works fine for what I like to do. But, it's also been bad in that my output is much more chaotic, both in sound and in times where I can be creative, since there isn't something as direct as other music to kind of ground me. However, it's doesn't really matter since I've always done this for fun and for myself first and foremost. Never cared about sharing a stage with any of my favorite artists. I got to do it a couple times at one point though and it wasn't through sounding like them. And now, well, I wouldn't know where to start. The ambient sounds and weight of where I live, however, will provide enough inspiration for the rest of my life. I don't know if other artists' influences can blind anyone from their goals though. Depends what they are. If the ultimate goal is to just sound like someone else and be alongside them, then one wasn't really blinded if that's what they achieve. If that's not what one wants to do, there's just too much room to **** with sound nowadays for one to not be able to put their own mark on the variation of a simple format.

:clap:

Great post !