themusiciansite.com

Tuesday, September 2, 2008

Evaluate your technology

I concluded my last post with a few questions that were birthed from Neil Postman's book, Technopoly. I don't know if any of you have read it but the basic premise is this: For every technology that we accept and implement into our culture we must first sacrifice something. He gave the example that when human beings first started to write, the transition began to shift from oral storytelling to simply writing. It is obvious that in this transition, the time-honored tradition of storytelling died out because it was no longer needed. In doing so, people became lazier and did not utilize their memory as much because all they had to do was to read a document instead of trying to remember things.

So take the case of CDs versus MP3 players. Or even records versus MP3 players. One could argue that when we only had record players, listening to music was more special because we could only do so at home. Also people would not have too many records so they might have appreciated their music more. You could even argue that recorded music has caused us to sacrifice seeing live music. For the better part of the last several thousand years, people have only been able to listen to music when others played live for them. It is only recently that we can carry our recorded music anywhere. Is it really a good thing that we now are encouraged to never listen to the real thing but rather to listen to a recorded version? Surely you lose a little bit of the wonder you might get form an actual performance.

Lastly one could argue that with MP3 players like the Apple iPod Nano with Video, our society is becoming increasingly isolated as you have people walking around with ear buds in listening to music so they never have to talk with strangers or think about their life. One could say that that is in fact a degeneration of our society.

Labels: Cds, ipod, mp3, records, vs

Monday, September 1, 2008

The Dying CD

I was wondering what you all thought about buying CD's versus MP3s. It is amazing to me that MP3 purchases from Itunes are becoming more popular each and every day. It makes me wonder if the brick and mortar cd shops like virgin records are bound to wind up floating belly up. Just how long can storefronts last when they are competing with companies such as Itunes or Napster which have no carrying costs?

My question is this, how do you guys procure your music? Do you pirate your music or do you purchase is legally? If you buy your music, do you tend to purchase cds or do you buy MP3s? One problem that I have with buying MP3s is that you pay for the music but then you end up burning the music onto a cd so you can listen to it in your car. Obviously this is not the case if you are playing your ipod through your car. For some reason I still prefer CDs in the car as opposed to listening through an Ipod. The biggest reason is that you get so much static with the ipod when you are taking over a radio station. The only way that it works well is if you have your ipod jacked directly into your cars audio system. Such an installment runs around 200 dollars.

Do you believe it is a positive transition that we have made from using Cds to using mp3 players? Before you immediately answer yes, give it some thought. Remember with every new technology, you are giving up something in return for that technology.

Labels: Cds, Cds traded for MP3s, ipod, mp3, technology, vs

Wednesday, July 23, 2008

Acoustic What Versus Electric Who? (Or, Acoustic Basses)

Hey there, Blogsville. So, I figured because of all the various Acoustic V. Electric cases being presented to the board, I'd round out the Rock Band setup with the age-old question:

Acoustic Vocals or Electric Vocals?

... yeah, I've always preferred C-3Po talking to R2D2 through a Vocoder, too.

Okay, so I wasn't here to talk about that. I admit it. I was actually here, instead, to discuss an actually much more time-held debate in the discussion of Acoustic V. Electric Basses. I know, it's getting a little silly all this talk on the blog about Acoustic V. Electric, Acoustic V. Electric. Honestly, my stance on all of it is that you should just know how to work with both of them, because they've both got the same basic theory behind them and they both have different uses for different applications. So I think I'm just going to talk about Acoustic Basses. Electrics have been spoken of plenty.

Sooo, Acoustic Basses. This has become a very interesting question relatively recently, due to the relatively recent popularity of Acoustic Bass Guitars, which are just weird. Cool weird, and I really like them, but weird. Of course, some people may have thought that when I said "Acoustic Bass" I was talking about Acoustic Bass Guitars, but no way, man. I'm a Jazz guy! I've been playing the "Acoustic", "Upright", "Double" Bass for awhile now and that's the original Bass.
(What's that?) Haha, well, on many occasions it's what people will call a "big Cello" because for some reason or another people know what a Cello is, but not a Bass. Uh, it's one of these:

They're pretty sweet, right? Yeah, don't worry, a lot of people have never heard one. Basically, they rock and they've been around longer than Electric Basses, Rock, Jazz, or uh, The United States, although not quite in the form we often see today. But it always rocked - I'd bet money the main riff of Metallica's Enter Sandman was played on one of these loooong before Jason Newsted ever ran it on Black Album. (I've done it. It sounds awesome.) And of course, Newsted's Bass Guitar gave him a different sound, but it still served the great purpose of giving the Bass Note. See, the interesting thing is that Basses are more of a function-serving instrument than a Guitar; they're there, oftentimes, to serve the purpose of giving the root note (Bass Note) a home in music. And this is cool because it means that as long as you have something rocking the Bass Note, whether it's an acoustic bass, electric bass, Low E-String of your guitar, left-hand piano, the big guy in the barbershop quartet, you've got music to build on. The root note is incredibly important for Musical Theory reasons I won't really delve into here, but suffice to say that everything else you hear sounds way different when you change the presentation note because you place all music in context of that note.

So bass-ically (groan, that was bad), it is a matter of how that sound is presented, but as long as the purpose is served it's less important how it's served - place it in the context of what you're working with. In a Jazz Combo, acoustics can be preeeetty sweet. The deep, resonating sound you get purely from having sound reverberate in a big wooden chamber is very unique, very warm, and often, very much what you're looking for when your group's sound needs that warmth (or way cooler, the sound of strings smacking the fingerboard you just can't get or even really do elsewhere). In an Orchestra, it's basically required, with a bow, to fit with the bowing style of the rest of your group. In a Rock Band... well, you can do it and it's awesome! But kind of like Electric Drums, it's sort an aesthetic thing. Rock Band bassists don't play these things. It's just kind of a common knowledge mindset. So they get huge cabinets and bass guitars with flames on them to match the look. And, of course, if your Rock Band is appropriately obnoxiously loud, your acoustic might not be able to serve its function if you don't have a really solid pickup on it. Just like Acoustic V. Electric anything, it's a function of both the look and sound of your band. And like Drums, Basses are more of a look than a sound thing when it comes down to this decision.

(Also, Upright Basses are harder to play. Most Electric Bassists couldn't do it without frets. Oh, and if you handed them a bow... Hahahaha.

Just learn both.)

Laters.

Andrew

Labels: acoustic, acoustic basses, vocoder, vs

Friday, July 18, 2008

Acoustic Versus Electric Guitar Part Two

If you are interested in rocking out or playing guitar in a band, the electric guitar is the right choice. Today I will attempt to detail the pros of an electric guitar when compared to an acoustic. First of all, the electric is much nicer to your arms and fingers. You don’t have to strum or pluck hard at all in order to get a loud sound from your amplifier. It has been said before that the acoustic guitar is more difficult to play than the electric. Reasoning is that the electric has lighter strings which are easier to press down. Also it can be safely said that you can do more to manipulate the sound of your guitar with an electric than an acoustic. Electric guitars were made to be played with an amplifier whereas many acoustics where made to be played without any assistance. There are more knobs and buttons associated with an Electric guitar but I assure you it is worth it. If you take some time in the beginning to become properly acquainted with all your guitar and amplifier has to offer, it will make learning down the road far easier.

If you think of your favorite rock song, there is a good chance that your favorite part of the song is one of the guitar solos. Guitar solos are generally kept to electric guitars. If you would like to one-day rock one of those solos, then the electric is the right choice for you. Keep in mind that acoustics tend to be strummed more and you tend to play chords more on acoustics whereas electrics you tend to play guitar leads and chords.

Labels: acoustic, acoustic guitars, electric guitars, guitars, shopping, vs

Wednesday, July 16, 2008

Acoustic versus electric guitar

Lets start out with a simple question: Which is better, the acoustic guitar or the electric? In your mind I’m sure you have already chosen your answer if you have had experience practicing and playing both types of guitar. However for those of you who are not sure whether they should take up acoustic or electric, read on. There are several benefits to both types of guitar. The only guitar I have ever owned has been an acoustic guitar. Right off the bat there are a few distinct advantages to an acoustic. First of all, the only thing you have to buy is the guitar itself as opposed to an electric guitar where you have to buy the guitar and amplifier etc. Also when you are bringing your guitar anywhere, it is much more convenient to simply be able to play your guitar without having to plug into a power source somewhere. Acoustic guitars are great for playing at the beach or anywhere for that matter. It is also quite nice to be able to pluck the strings of an acoustic guitar and to hear the beautiful harmonious sounds and the vibration that comes from nothing more than your hand stroking across the strings. I personally enjoyed the soothing feel of an acoustic guitar compared to an electric. In the end, it really comes down to what kind of music you want to play. If you want soothing relaxation or romance music, the acoustic is right for you. However if you want to rock out with some metal, then you have no choice but to purchase the electric.

Labels: acoustic, acoustic guitars, electric guitars, guitars, shopping, vs

Friday, July 11, 2008

Acoustic Verses Electric Continued

Yesterday I discussed a decision that every drummer in the twenty-first century must face – whether to rock with the traditional drum set or embrace technology for all its worth with electronic drums. I must admit that I was slightly biased towards an electronic drum set in my article yesterday. However I will try to list a few of the cons of an electronic set in the hopes of evening things out to give a balanced perspective.
In all honesty, there is no substitute for a good old-fashioned acoustic drum set. If we are being sincere, you and I both know that electronic drum sets have a lot of capabilities but reproducing acoustic drum sounds perfectly is not among their skill set. There is also the issue of dependency when you operate on an electronic drum set. You are dependent on a power supply as well as whatever speaker system you own for your drums. Fred Fishburne said it best when he said, “Have you ever seen a marching band with an electronic drum line?” He continued to say that with electronic sounds, it is not really the artist that is creating the sound but rather a machine. Whereas if you play the acoustic drums, there is no one to share the glory with when you deliver a stellar performance.
In the end, every musician must make up their mind for themselves about this rather controversial issue. For those of you who have experience with the acoustic or electronic drums, feel free to share your sentiments. I will leave you with this question: Which is better, acoustic drums or electric?

Labels: acoustic, drums, electric drums, music, review, shopping, supplies, technology, vs

Thursday, July 10, 2008

Acoustic Verses Electric Drums

If you are considering taking up drumming, you might want to weigh a few variables to determine whether you want to rock it the good old fashion way or whether you want to roll with all technology has to offer. First and foremost you need to determine whether a traditional drum set will be disruptive to you, your family, and the people who live near you. If you live in an apartment, acoustic drums are pretty much out. Even when you live in your own house and the neighbors live 20-30 yards away, they might still complain about the noise. Also you won’t be able to practice during your own hours if you have to worry about waking up family/neighbors. However if you go with an electric drum set, you can play till the wee hours of the morning even if there is nothing more that a thin wall separating you from your neighbor’s apartment. With electric drums, you can put on the headphones and listen to your drumming as loud as you would like. This is also beneficial for your ears because sometimes consistently beating on a drum set can damage your hearing. Whenever you would like to play a little louder, or if you would like to perform for an audience or with a band, you simply hook your electric drum set up to a speaker system and you can churn out some pretty sweet tunes.

Labels: acoustic, acoustic drums, drums, electric drums, shopping, vs

Tuesday, July 8, 2008

Natural VS. Learned Skill

As I was thinking about my post for this blog I began to wonder what role formal musical training plays in the progression of a normal musicians skill. For instance, I would be interested to know how many people in this blog have taken music classes at school. Do you believe that these classes are very helpful? In my experience it seems as though great musicians can be born out of two circumstances. Some musicians are naturally inclined and learn only by listening to other musicians. Others are taught by personal and group teachers to hone in on their skills. My question is this: is one type of musician better than the other? In your experience are the musicians who are naturally inclined towards music and self taught more skilled than those who have trained and practiced with professionals?

These questions have stemmed out of a personal relationship that I have. A friend of mine has always been incredibly musically inclined. He plays the guitar, sings, and plays the drums. In high school he took courses on music and music theory ect. He then continued this education in college at Belmont University. I began to wonder about this because I also had another friend who never had a lesson in piano. Yet he could play any song he had ever heard. Even if he had only listened to that tune once. Also if you look at prodigies such as Mozart you will find that by the age of five they played famous works. Such skills cannot be taught but are innate. That is why I am asking whether you think the best musicians are innately blessed with talent or if they are the ones who work the hardest or if it is some combination of natural skill and hard work.

Labels: classical, mozart, music genre, musicians, musicians self taught vs trained, vs