4 ms·
People being able to afford professional equipment and professional session musicians vs a guy recording himself in a bedroom over a MIDI karaoke track is not t
by bombolo 3y ago
People being able to afford professional equipment and professional session musicians vs a guy recording himself in a bedroom over a MIDI karaoke track is not the same at all.
If you can't hear the difference, see a doctor.
- deadbeeves 3y agoIt sounds like you're saying that because one is more expensive than the other it is therefore better.
- ddq 3y agoNo, I'm sorry but you are ignorant.
- bombolo 3y agoI agree that a 2 million $ guitar isn't better than a 2k$ guitar. But a 2k$ guitar is certainly better than a 50$ guitar. Not only in how it sounds but in how easy it is to play it. My 1st guitar was bad so I couldn't do barrè chords. I thought I was bad and pros could do it. Turned out pros just had better guitars. Better guitars also have less noise, better cables are shielded. Yes, more expensive is better (up to a point).
- deadbeeves 3y agoYes. However, the instrument being better just means the sound it makes will be better, not that the music the musician makes with it will be better. EDIT: I should say the sound will likely better, not just better.
- bombolo 3y agoI just gave you an example of how it's easier to play, allowing more music to be played... It's not just about the sound.
- t0bia_s 3y agoMany don't see a difference. Just amount of coolnes. You can apply this on professional filmmaking or vlogging. I guess amount of time consumed audiovisual production today is much higher on amateurish production thanks to antisocial networks.
- bombolo 3y agoThey might not be able to point exactly the problem, but they will most certainly enjoy better produced content.
- t0bia_s 3y agoIf you are used to fast editing, loud music and cheap filters, you'll get hard time to watch ie Malicks films, listen concertos or go to photography exhibition. No doubled about qulity. Nowadays most valuable is attention. Cheap stimuli is easier to consume. That's what technology teach us.
- ilyt 3y agoYou can make great sounding music using nothing but free or extremely cheap software. But yeah, still need a good mic. Even when you go into hardware you can still get plenty for cheap.
- bombolo 3y agoYou need time, which isn't cheap :)
- ilyt 3y agoYeah turns out to get skills that make you money you need to invest something, glad you finally discovered that after decades of ignorance
- bombolo 3y agoTurns out that having skills to get money is exactly the point I was arguing, in response to "there is an infinite supply of (crappy) music, so its value is 0"… Good that you changed your mind.
- ben_w 3y agoMost people are not professional music critics, and most of their consumption is as a backing track to the rest of their life. You could replace most of this category with a Markov chain bouncing up and down a simple key without most people even thinking about it, and I know because this is exactly how I made music for my shareware video games a decade ago.
- bombolo 3y agoMost people are not professional movie critics and enjoy more a hollywood film rather than me recording barbie dolls and making them talk. Did your video game sell as much as outcast? A game with a proper music score. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outcast_(video_game) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outcast_(video_game) Does your game have a wikipedia entry? Could I assume that people enjoyed outcast more than your hobby game?
- ux-app 3y agolol, what a fantastically obscure game to choose!
- ben_w 3y ago> Most people are not professional movie critics and enjoy more a hollywood film rather than me recording barbie dolls and making them talk. Sure, but they'll also watch daily soap operas, and the meme "I showed my favourite film to a loved one, but they paid no attention" predates multi-screening. > Did your video game sell as much as outcast? A game with a proper music score. Even in aggregate over all the games: I wish :P But the real question is: how much of that was the music? Even now, were I to redo that period of my life (and so no need to caveat markets changing), the music isn't what I'd focus on changing — shareware was already a bad idea though I didn't realise it, MacOS shareware written in Java just as MacOS got its own (ObjC only) app store moreso.
- wwweston 3y ago> You could replace most of this category with a Markov chain bouncing up and down a simple key without most people even thinking about it That actually makes Spotify worse, because they could have offered that product instead of using huge sums of capital to reshape the expectation anybody with a device is entitled to listen to any work on demand for free. I guess the good news is that it wouldn't cause a fuss if someone were to change policy so that you can't pay out buffet streaming like it's digital radio and people ended up having to buy songs or at least do the honest work of piracy if they won't accept the app directing programming. After all, most people are just as happy listening to a Markov chain generate bloops for free.