Music Sampling and the Death of Creativity
A friend of mine sent me a note on how music sampling (taking pieces of prerecorded material and making new music) seemed to indicate that we are running out of creativity in music. New technologies allow an increasingly large group of people to "create" new music though much of it is not necessarily original. Is this what we are doomed to? Is music really dead?
Basically, it would seem, that everything that has been made in the past is simply scrap parts for use in something today. It won’t be long before music from the 50s-90s is simply looked at for its modules rather than the sum of its parts. There will be a few of us around who will differ I guess. Listening to what passes as progressive music today, I find much of it to be listenable. Why? Because most of it is made up of things that I liked in the past. The vocals can be completely atrocious and the lyrics pure distilled drivel but if it has the right patchwork of remnants, it can be listenable. O.K., now that I realize that, nothing will be listenable again….
On the more contentious area of sampling and why people can’t make something original- The question is not WHY can’t people make something original but why would they WANT to make anything original. I guess it all depends upon what you are trying to accomplish. If you are trying to make art, then you probably shouldn’t be sampling. If you are trying to become famous and/or make money, then you should sample. You have the knowledge of 1 million songs out there and what pleases the human brain- it’s like having 50 years of market research. Why waste time coming up with something new when you can cobble together the combined experience of 100,000 artists. And the great thing is…You don’t have to know what you are doing! No need to go to music school or spend hours strumming on the guitar or tootling away on the synthesizer. Slap together 12 modules in some order and you have something.
So, is music dead? Have we truly run out of ideas? As always, we are quick to write obituaries. Nietzche declared that God is Dead. Early 20th Century German artists declared “Die Kunst ist Tott” (Art is dead). Hegel said history could die and Fukuyama declared it dead- though now he is back-peddling a bit…why would anyone buy one of his books now? I’m not so sure music is dead. It has just come down to the masses.
What does this mean? For serious musicians, it would seem to indicate a cheapening- a lessening of value because there is an increase in supply. There is probably some truth in that. I think what it really means is that there is an increase in competition and it falls to these serious musicians to “add value” to music creation. If music is dead, then it will fall to a new generation of musicians to create and be the source of new influences- to be the source of modules. There is nothing new with this. The problem is that these musicians have to be able to yell above a larger crowd and this IS new.
As for the general world of creativity and the increasing difficulty of making money/a living off of creating new music or photography, I would tend to agree. There are fewer “Barriers to entry” as there once was. It is much cheaper than it used to be to create things since more people can afford the machinery. The ease of use of these machines also means that many more (not everyone) can create art regardless of educational preparation. I guess one’s view on this as a good or bad depends upon who you are. As consumers of general goods, it is generally agreed that people can afford to buy more than they used to (in the U.S.) because more goods are made in cheaper countries (fewer barriers to entry)- more clothes, more toys, cheap electronics. We can save the money for bigger houses, bigger cars and more fuel. Is the same thing happening in art? I’m not so sure. I have trouble seeing art as a commodity. However, I do believe that there is more competition in art and more ways to display one’s art. Like all competition, it will force innovation. The problem may very well lay in laying claim to that intellectual capital in the courts.
A friend of mine sent me a note on how music sampling (taking pieces of prerecorded material and making new music) seemed to indicate that we are running out of creativity in music. New technologies allow an increasingly large group of people to "create" new music though much of it is not necessarily original. Is this what we are doomed to? Is music really dead?
Basically, it would seem, that everything that has been made in the past is simply scrap parts for use in something today. It won’t be long before music from the 50s-90s is simply looked at for its modules rather than the sum of its parts. There will be a few of us around who will differ I guess. Listening to what passes as progressive music today, I find much of it to be listenable. Why? Because most of it is made up of things that I liked in the past. The vocals can be completely atrocious and the lyrics pure distilled drivel but if it has the right patchwork of remnants, it can be listenable. O.K., now that I realize that, nothing will be listenable again….
On the more contentious area of sampling and why people can’t make something original- The question is not WHY can’t people make something original but why would they WANT to make anything original. I guess it all depends upon what you are trying to accomplish. If you are trying to make art, then you probably shouldn’t be sampling. If you are trying to become famous and/or make money, then you should sample. You have the knowledge of 1 million songs out there and what pleases the human brain- it’s like having 50 years of market research. Why waste time coming up with something new when you can cobble together the combined experience of 100,000 artists. And the great thing is…You don’t have to know what you are doing! No need to go to music school or spend hours strumming on the guitar or tootling away on the synthesizer. Slap together 12 modules in some order and you have something.
So, is music dead? Have we truly run out of ideas? As always, we are quick to write obituaries. Nietzche declared that God is Dead. Early 20th Century German artists declared “Die Kunst ist Tott” (Art is dead). Hegel said history could die and Fukuyama declared it dead- though now he is back-peddling a bit…why would anyone buy one of his books now? I’m not so sure music is dead. It has just come down to the masses.
What does this mean? For serious musicians, it would seem to indicate a cheapening- a lessening of value because there is an increase in supply. There is probably some truth in that. I think what it really means is that there is an increase in competition and it falls to these serious musicians to “add value” to music creation. If music is dead, then it will fall to a new generation of musicians to create and be the source of new influences- to be the source of modules. There is nothing new with this. The problem is that these musicians have to be able to yell above a larger crowd and this IS new.
As for the general world of creativity and the increasing difficulty of making money/a living off of creating new music or photography, I would tend to agree. There are fewer “Barriers to entry” as there once was. It is much cheaper than it used to be to create things since more people can afford the machinery. The ease of use of these machines also means that many more (not everyone) can create art regardless of educational preparation. I guess one’s view on this as a good or bad depends upon who you are. As consumers of general goods, it is generally agreed that people can afford to buy more than they used to (in the U.S.) because more goods are made in cheaper countries (fewer barriers to entry)- more clothes, more toys, cheap electronics. We can save the money for bigger houses, bigger cars and more fuel. Is the same thing happening in art? I’m not so sure. I have trouble seeing art as a commodity. However, I do believe that there is more competition in art and more ways to display one’s art. Like all competition, it will force innovation. The problem may very well lay in laying claim to that intellectual capital in the courts.
posted by LMI1 at 6:19 PM
1 Comments:
Art is the exhibition of life. Only when it ceases entirely will we stop talking about art and how little or how much it matters in context.
As to your sampling question I would pose this comment -
Sampling is a good thing (even art)certainly in two instances -
If it betters through comparison (or in reviving) the original work.
or if the sample prresents the old work in a new light (even if it is critical of the subject)
Post a Comment
<< Home