On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 11:26:40AM -0400, Kieren MacMillan wrote: > Rather, I'm railing against the following [possibly inevitable, but still > disheartening] reality: > > In the 1940s, a barometer of popular taste was Frank Sinatra ... > In the 1960s, the barometer was Bob Dylan (who can write great ... > Today, the barometer is people who can do none of the above, > doing *all* of the above -- heavily "assisted" by AutoTune™, > AutoCorrect™, and all the other AutoCrutches™ "creators" have > come to rely on, and (more unfortunately) consumers have come to > accept (or even prefer).
I don't find this disheartening -- I consider this a triumph of science. Leaving aside the effects of marketing (which are substantial, and defrays my "popular = good" claim from a few days ago), we've (apparently) reached the point where the combined efforts of a singer, sound engineers, computer programmers, composers, arrangers, sound sample recordings, and the generic term "producers", produces more popular music than a single singer (or a single singer/piano/guitar player / poet/composer). Granted, in many (most?) ways, a "produced" musical recording is *not* the same art form as a live music concert. I somewhat consider "produced music recordings" to be in a category like theatre or movies -- they might involve live music at some point (as background), but the final product involves a huge number of components (and people) other than live musicians playing music. *shrug* Perhaps in a few years, the "live music recordings vs. produced music" division will be more clear in people's minds. Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
