quoted 6 lines It's easy to convince yourself that you need tons of expensive gear to>> It's easy to convince yourself that you need tons of expensive gear to
>> make better tracks, but the real truth is you can create quality music
>> with *very* little monetary investment if you take it upon yourself to
>> completely exploit the capabilities of what little you've got.. even
>> archaic devices like reel-to-reels and Kmart Casios can create interesting
>> soundscapes.
There are loads of people who've created great records in the past with next
to no equipment - records that are (IMO) often much more interesting than
the majority of the hi-tech digital ambient / techno / whatever records that
come out these days. And often the fact that they were produced in bedrooms
on cheap equipment, mastered on cassettes, etc. has given them that raw,
noisy edge that makes them (even more) interesting. It's like with brightly
lit rooms - you can see everything clearly, but when you turn off the light
and replace it with a candle, the wavering light makes you guess at the
things you can't really see beyond the depth of the flickering shadows.
Or something.
Hey, I almost got a record deal once for tracks recorded with nothing but a
386 plus SoundBlaster 16 - all tracker .MOD's built from semi-stereo 8 bit
44.1 kHz samples, run through a soundcard that made soft but audible noises
every time the harddisk started spinning. No synths, no effects, no filters,
not even MIDI. One track that was released on a compilation CD was even 8
bit mono at a 13 kHz sampling rate - and some people really liked it
(including the guys who almost signed me later on).
Are we listening to music or are we actually admiring how perfectly,
digitally, totally silent the pauses inbetween are?
Maarten
on now: Monoton - Tonfolge