chipmusic.org is an online community in respect and relation to chip music, art and its parallels.
You are not logged in. Please login or register.
here's what i think of people who disagree with me
<ant1> if you quickly write a lot of short songs, you are getting a lot of practise at writing the most important parts of a song, at getting your ideas down, etc
<ant1> i don't see how that is destined to make you a bad musician who never put any effort in
danimal cannon wrote:This is obviously a troll thread, but try to reimagine the title: "Is it worth putting actual effort into your craft?"
Yeah.
no it is not a troll thread, i was just wondering
some people make really good music in an hour and some people make really bad music in a month. so i don't think it is obvious that spending more t ime must definitely better
which is why i decided to ask
listen, the best song I've ever heard (and best chiptune I've ever heard) was made in one hour. But the person who made it put countless hours into his craft, mastering it. In fact, he even practiced doing compositions in an hour as an exercise (its a really good one!).
It doesn't matter how long it takes you to make a song. Inspiration can strike anywhere, but you have to actually put in the time beforehand to actually be able to capture it. Some tracks on my album were made in a night or 2. Others were made over the course of months.
I get music jobs because I can make decent music, RIGHT AWAY. Like, my deadline is often 3 days later and I have to be able to make something that not only fits the theme but also sounds good in terms of composition, but also production. Guess what? That has taken me ~15 years of music making, and ~7 years of audio production to be able to do that.
But even still, stuff that I spend a little more time with usually turns out better.
Last edited by danimal cannon (Jul 9, 2012 5:59 pm)
Time, effort, and talent (which to me, is only as relevant as anything genetic is) have so little relation that they are not worth considering. I think people should be willing to try things they wouldn't normally do to strengthen composing but there are no correct answers. I'm surprised this thread is still alive. 
ant1 wrote:no it is not a troll thread, i was just wondering
some people make really good music in an hour and some people make really bad music in a month. so i don't think it is obvious that spending more t ime must definitely better
which is why i decided to ask
listen, the best song I've ever heard (and best chiptune I've ever heard) was made in one hour. But the person who made it put countless hours into his craft, mastering it. In fact, he even practiced doing compositions in an hour as an exercise (its a really good one!).
It doesn't matter how long it takes you to make a song. Inspiration can strike anywhere, but you have to actually put in the time beforehand to actually be able to capture it. Some tracks on my album were made in a night or 2. Others were made over the course of months.
I get music jobs because I can make decent music, RIGHT AWAY. Like, my deadline is often 3 days later and I have to be able to make something that not only fits the theme but also sounds good in terms of composition, but also production. Guess what? That has taken me ~15 years of music making, and ~7 years of audio production to be able to do that.
But even still, stuff that I spend a little more time with usually turns out better.
the thread isn't about whether one should spend time on music. it's about whether one should spend a long amount of time on a song. on a SINGLE song. of course you have to practise.
oh well you didn't really GET the thread
maybe it was a bad thread to begin with
Last edited by ant1 (Jul 9, 2012 6:47 pm)
danimal cannon wrote:listen, the best song I've ever heard (and best chiptune I've ever heard) was made in one hour. But the person who made it put countless hours into his craft, mastering it. In fact, he even practiced doing compositions in an hour as an exercise (its a really good one!).
It doesn't matter how long it takes you to make a song. Inspiration can strike anywhere, but you have to actually put in the time beforehand to actually be able to capture it. Some tracks on my album were made in a night or 2. Others were made over the course of months.
I get music jobs because I can make decent music, RIGHT AWAY. Like, my deadline is often 3 days later and I have to be able to make something that not only fits the theme but also sounds good in terms of composition, but also production. Guess what? That has taken me ~15 years of music making, and ~7 years of audio production to be able to do that.
But even still, stuff that I spend a little more time with usually turns out better.
the thread isn't about whether one should spend time on music. it's about whether one should spend a long amount of time on a song. on a SINGLE song. of course you have to practise.
oh well you didn't really GET the thread
maybe it was a bad thread to begin with
But even when you are making a single song, that is still practice. Sometimes spending months on one song can help you practice other techniques. When you first start out, you take a while to finish a crappy song. By finishing a song, you may gain skills that you wouldn't by not. As you get better, you don't need to put as much time into making a song, but during your early stages you do. This all depends on a lot of factors, so it can't really be answered. I feel if a song isn't finished, then you shouldn't move onto another. It's like leaving a Rubik's cube half finished and then trying to solve another up to that point.
danimal cannon wrote:listen, the best song I've ever heard (and best chiptune I've ever heard) was made in one hour. But the person who made it put countless hours into his craft, mastering it. In fact, he even practiced doing compositions in an hour as an exercise (its a really good one!).
It doesn't matter how long it takes you to make a song. Inspiration can strike anywhere, but you have to actually put in the time beforehand to actually be able to capture it. Some tracks on my album were made in a night or 2. Others were made over the course of months.
I get music jobs because I can make decent music, RIGHT AWAY. Like, my deadline is often 3 days later and I have to be able to make something that not only fits the theme but also sounds good in terms of composition, but also production. Guess what? That has taken me ~15 years of music making, and ~7 years of audio production to be able to do that.
But even still, stuff that I spend a little more time with usually turns out better.
the thread isn't about whether one should spend time on music. it's about whether one should spend a long amount of time on a song. on a SINGLE song. of course you have to practise.
oh well you didn't really GET the thread
maybe it was a bad thread to begin with
Oh I get it. I was talking about specific single songs?
Spend as much time as you need to make a good song. /thread.
chipjazz musicians toiling over EDx commands for hours, THEY ARE THE REAL PROFESSIONALS.
I know /thread already happened, but think about the intense depression that follows after you finish a song.
will you postpone the end of that process forever, so you always live your life in that state of anticipation?
or will you finish each song as quickly as possible, repeatedly experiencing that depression until you become numb to it?
Why would you ever be depressed upon completion of a song? We get hyped man, total honeymoon phase for this new badass song!
... but then that phase ends and you realize that song isn't really that great, so you just go "meh let's make a new one"
song~making~is~easy~and~fun
I really need to pay attention to batsly's 'SWIMM SAYS RELAX' shirt
chipjazz musicians toiling over EDx commands for hours, THEY ARE THE REAL PROFESSIONALS.
This board needs a sarcasm tag.
4mat wrote:chipjazz musicians toiling over EDx commands for hours, THEY ARE THE REAL PROFESSIONALS.
This board needs a sarcasm tag.
capslock is the sarcasm tag...
But even when you are making a single song, that is still practice. Sometimes spending months on one song can help you practice other techniques. When you first start out, you take a while to finish a crappy song. By finishing a song, you may gain skills that you wouldn't by not. As you get better, you don't need to put as much time into making a song, but during your early stages you do. This all depends on a lot of factors, so it can't really be answered. I feel if a song isn't finished, then you shouldn't move onto another. It's like leaving a Rubik's cube half finished and then trying to solve another up to that point.
You don't need to work for long periods of time on a single song to improve your skills. Much like any puzzle analogy you may come up with, working on multiple problems at once will sometimes be the most productive way to attack them.
Frostbyte wrote:Speak to any jazz musician, and they spend years upon years learning how to improvise...and those are mostly not original compositions. Jazz works a lot differently haha.
I guess you are trying to say that when estimating the time spent on a composition we should include our whole musical history as well.
I also think that not only does time not relate to effort, but effort isn't necessarily related to quality either. Some people are naturals, and some will die still sucking.
Well, no that's not really what I'm saying. At least for sax/trumpet improv, its not really exactly instant on the spot composition. A player learns a lot of traditional licks and they make their own licks that they figure out harmonically, and then when they're in an improv session (like the Miles Davis records referenced), they play pre-written tracks (for the most part) that they have practiced before and learned how they can harmonically work, then on the spot, we string together these pre-learned licks in a way that makes sense to the changes that are happening. This is a process that combines practice and composition. At some point you'll just "speak the language" and play freely, but that's just you doing the same thing, thinking less. So how long did it take them to make those songs? I dunno, it depends on what you define as writing a jazz song. But a more accurate statement would be that they were recorded in 2 days.
What I'm saying is that jazz doesn't really fit this kind of question...it's a different matter entirely. Electronic music is all composition. Jazz is a whole other animal.
Last edited by Frostbyte (Jul 9, 2012 9:25 pm)
edit: life's too short.
Last edited by 4mat (Jul 9, 2012 9:46 pm)