4 ms·

They didn't "kill" music -- which is impossible as long as it's an activity that has inherent value for humans -- but several of these inventions have dramatica

They didn't "kill" music -- which is impossible as long as it's an activity that has inherent value for humans -- but several of these inventions have dramatically changed the economic value of musical skills and therefore, to some extent, the viability of investment in developing those skills. That has second order effects on what kind of music can get made (and by who) and find its way into the culture. Maybe a lot of these are reasonable tradeoffs. I sure love recorded music, even though it did hit the livelihood of gigging musicians. I like having an orchestra I can arrange for in my computer, even though it reduces the demand for studio musicians. I don't want to un-invent these things (nor do I think that's possible). But I recognize the impact and know that musicians who saw threats weren't wrong. I do, however, want to uninvent Spotify and any services like it -- or at least radically change the cost structure. As they're now constituted, they're not a reasonable tradeoff; they don't really introduce a new opportunity, they're simply plays to combine the power of a new centralized distribution channel that has both broadcast and on-demand capabilities with arbitrage opportunities from externalized and/or sunk production costs and digital licensing loopholes to push the economic rewards for producing recordings down to fractional rates previous reserved for non-demand broadcast levels. Consumers love it, of course, because it's only marginally more expensive than piracy, more convenient, and has the imprimatur of legitimacy, but that's largely because services like Spotify are splitting some of the cost externalizations with us as they overall subtract value from the sector.

TheOtherHobbes 8y ago
That's the huge irony of the Fairlight. In capable hands it was an absolute wonder. But longer term, sampling has been a a bit of a musical disaster, making it easy to stitch together copy-paste music-by-numbers, and for a generation and a half of music consumers to persuade themselves that the cultural and economic value of music is limited to the marginal cost of copying a file. The aesthetic changed from creative assimilation and active reinterpretation of musical ideas to patchwork assembly of mechanical reproductions. Some people will say they're identical. That's wholly wrong - they aren't at all. While it's possible to make sample-based music with creative flair (e.g. Amon Tobin) the technology also makes it hugely easier to generate floods of low-value musical mimicry.
- mmjaa 8y ago
  Music is one of those things that can have a very high-quality top end, and a very low-quality low-end. It doesn't really matter, ultimately the 'quality' is in the ears of the perceiver. So much great stuff now considered standard once started out as someones messy dross... its a wheel that turns, and rapidly!
  - coldtea 8y ago
    >It doesn't really matter, ultimately the 'quality' is in the ears of the perceiver. Only if one thinks that "anything goes" and doesn't believe music and lyrics has any importance for the cultural development of society (and the personal development of the listener). Which is quite a modern idea...
    - mmjaa 8y ago
      I think there is a sizeable community of musicians for whom "doing things different than the mainstream" is a means by which important cultural development occurs. In fact for them, its probably more important than playing at the status quo. And I don't think this is a modern idea. Music never stays in a single place.
      - coldtea 8y ago
        >I think there is a sizeable community of musicians for whom "doing things different than the mainstream" is a means by which important cultural development occurs. In fact for them, its probably more important than playing at the status quo. Yes, sadly there's a culture of novelty for the sake of it, as opposed to depth.
        mmjaa 8y ago
        Your novelty and my depth are entirely subjective realities.
        8y ago

TheOtherHobbes 8y ago

That's the huge irony of the Fairlight. In capable hands it was an absolute wonder. But longer term, sampling has been a a bit of a musical disaster, making it easy to stitch together copy-paste music-by-numbers, and for a generation and a half of music consumers to persuade themselves that the cultural and economic value of music is limited to the marginal cost of copying a file. The aesthetic changed from creative assimilation and active reinterpretation of musical ideas to patchwork assembly of mechanical reproductions. Some people will say they're identical. That's wholly wrong - they aren't at all. While it's possible to make sample-based music with creative flair (e.g. Amon Tobin) the technology also makes it hugely easier to generate floods of low-value musical mimicry.

mmjaa 8y ago
Music is one of those things that can have a very high-quality top end, and a very low-quality low-end. It doesn't really matter, ultimately the 'quality' is in the ears of the perceiver. So much great stuff now considered standard once started out as someones messy dross... its a wheel that turns, and rapidly!
- coldtea 8y ago
  >It doesn't really matter, ultimately the 'quality' is in the ears of the perceiver. Only if one thinks that "anything goes" and doesn't believe music and lyrics has any importance for the cultural development of society (and the personal development of the listener). Which is quite a modern idea...
  - mmjaa 8y ago
    I think there is a sizeable community of musicians for whom "doing things different than the mainstream" is a means by which important cultural development occurs. In fact for them, its probably more important than playing at the status quo. And I don't think this is a modern idea. Music never stays in a single place.
    - coldtea 8y ago
      >I think there is a sizeable community of musicians for whom "doing things different than the mainstream" is a means by which important cultural development occurs. In fact for them, its probably more important than playing at the status quo. Yes, sadly there's a culture of novelty for the sake of it, as opposed to depth.
      - mmjaa 8y ago
        Your novelty and my depth are entirely subjective realities.
        8y ago