I don't believe this is how great music usually comes about, not even Techno. It's missing the other essential piece. Being influenced by and completely immersed in a niche of other brilliant people. (The most extreme example of this would be the 90's Detroit-Berlin connection.)
Paired with an obsessive work ethic in the studio.
If it's only obsession in the studio, things come out dry, uninspired. If there's no surge of energy running through your bones when making the music, why would anyone else feel anything? Mixing and the music sounding "professional" is completely secondary. Even detrimental a lot of the time, to be honest.
Applies to many other things than music as well. I don't any great technology comes out and about without that loop, either.
"Being influenced by and completely immersed in a niche of other brilliant people."
The author does mention that part of the process is collaboration with other musicians. It seems by setting their "chores" they are increasing their immersion.
Justin Vernon disappeared to a cabin in Wisconsin for months, where he wrote and recorded one of the greatest and most popular folk rock albums of all time.
I actually thought about that while writing the original comment as well. For Emma, Forever Ago is one of my all time favorite albums, good example of raw emotion with no need for any bells or whistles.
The big thing there is, that he already was a professional musician and completely inside a creative scene before leaving for the cabin. (DeYarmond Edison was the band he was in before Bon Iver.)
But yes, things were going way sideways for him, liver issues with mono, so he went to process whatever was going on and had been going on in complete isolation. (Although for the next album, he actually set up a whole "creative commune", a new band around Bon Iver instead of it being just himself, and so on. And I think you can hear the colors he wanted back in the music from it directly.)
A lot of examples of artists going into bouts of isolation, but almost always coming into it from an intense experience. So, the two don't have to be day to day intertwined, although for Techno specifically it's usually the case.
Could great works substitute for having a scene? After all, writers have been inspired by Dostoevsky without being part of the same scene as him, and often without being part of a scene at all.
This lines up with my own experience with writing and (more recently) blogging.
You get over the fear of writing by doing a LOT of it, until you get to a point where writing a story or blog post stops feeling "special" and becomes just another thing you do. Each individual piece of writing stops feeling like an important work of art that you must get right at any cost, and becomes more like doing the dishes or taking out the garbage.
You can then separate the act of creating from the act of curating and editing. I regularly cut thousands of words from my writing before I share in public. I regularly throw away (well, archive) fully written drafts because I don't like them. A few years ago, this would've been unimaginable. Today, it feels like part of the process.
At some point, you gain confidence that you'll always have another story, another blog post, another poem inside you. If the current thing sucks, you just write another thing, and another, and another, until something clicks. It's freeing.
IME when creative work starts feeling like "just a job" is EXACTLY when it also becomes most fulfilling and satisfying.
I've heard this sentiment repeated and I believe it, but at least the purpose of my own blog is to communicate insights I've had. I almost make a point out of not blogging unless I feel that I have something truly interesting to share. It seems that flipping that around would come at a price.
Come think it, I feel that I have on the other side of this many times: I read a post or watch a video that opens up something in my brain and I get a sort of crush on the author. I read everything they write or watch all their videos. For some authors, I retain interest. But for others, where it seems like they produce regularly in order to maintain the frequency, I lose interest.
> I've heard this sentiment repeated and I believe it, but at least the purpose of my own blog is to communicate insights I've had. I almost make a point out of not blogging unless I feel that I have something truly interesting to share. It seems that flipping that around would come at a price.
That's where the editing and curation step comes in, at least for me. I write a lot more than I publish. If my writing:publishing ratio ever became 1:1, I'll stop publishing things that are interesting and insightful (well, interesting and insightful to me personally; other people might judge my writing differently).
Sometimes what works for me is to write something and let it sit in my drafts for a few days. Then if I read it back and still find it worth sharing, I polish it and hit the publish button. If not, it goes into a folder called "Retired" in my Obsidian.
The meaning of this is dismayingly slippery. You're presumably being creative and enjoying it, for all this "just a job".
> Routines might be a better name, but I like how action-oriented and well defined "chore" sounds.
The article's use of "boring" is somewhat misleading too, I think. It's trendy to say that being bored is good, but really that's always about enjoying patience, not about experiencing drudgery and having a miserable time.
Like with so many other artistic things, people can have very different workflows. Some people need to produce a lot of material, consistently, and then filter out. Stephen King is known for having such a workflow. Others will only produce when they find the motivation, and can go for long periods without producing anything.
A lot of my hobbyist musician friends were way more prolific during covid. The extra time seemed to have unlocked their ability to be way more creative to de-stress. I myself had a burst of activity recording music and improving my guitar technique for a couple of years.Sadly it dipped again post covid. However, more recently I'm trying to find a middle ground with AI cutting corners with the boring repeatable stuff of audio engineering and shifting focus to the creative and the technique. Feels like things have turned the corner here and I can get a pretty professional mix out quick without sacrificing my creativity. I love that middle ground where AI is truly helping me accelerate my output as a hired gun that mixes my sound while the calluses and note selections/ arrangement are all mine.
I’ve been a recording musician for 28 years. Making music a boring chore is not the answer. The best musicians do two things: learn to turn off the over-thinking part of the brain that blocks creativity and second, understand music theory in depth for when that fails and you get stuck.
The joy of participating in music, to me, is one of the few domains where we can still, to an extent, hide away from the relentless enclosure and commodification of every facet of our existence in the name of capitalist value extraction. Imagining oneself as an assembly line in order to rush past the experience of the creative process and arrive as quickly as possible at a finished artifact — to me this is an act of submission. It is accepting that one's market value as a musician, as measured by the number and popularity of commodities they produce, is of vastly greater importance than the depth and quality of their musical experiences, than any joy, pleasure, satisfaction, connection, growth, expression, or catharsis they experience through their participation in music.
I have no doubt this is an effective way to end up with a bunch of finished tracks. But I can't help but feel that it is missing the point.
> I have no doubt this is an effective way to end up with a bunch of finished tracks. But I can't help but feel that it is missing the point.
It depends what your goal is - if your goal is to have an enjoyable hobby, then yes, it's probably missing the point.
If your goal is to have the best outputs, then that might involve a different creative process.
If your goal is to make (good amounts of) money, then the popularity of your music is actually important. Writing music that will be popular is a skill in itself, which is probably a different skill to just writing the music that you find the most joy and satisfaction in writing. Writing music that brings you joy and hoping others find the same joy in it might work, but I suspect the musicians making the most money are often working hard to write what the market wants/accepts rather than just what brings them the most joy. There will be exceptions to every rule however.
My consternation comes from the fact that we seem, culturally, to have arrived at a place where we value the creation of music (or rather, musical artifacts) in the service of gaining something (fame and profit, primarily) over enjoyment of the experience of music.
I don't believe this is how great music usually comes about, not even Techno. It's missing the other essential piece. Being influenced by and completely immersed in a niche of other brilliant people. (The most extreme example of this would be the 90's Detroit-Berlin connection.)
Paired with an obsessive work ethic in the studio.
If it's only obsession in the studio, things come out dry, uninspired. If there's no surge of energy running through your bones when making the music, why would anyone else feel anything? Mixing and the music sounding "professional" is completely secondary. Even detrimental a lot of the time, to be honest.
Applies to many other things than music as well. I don't any great technology comes out and about without that loop, either.
"Being influenced by and completely immersed in a niche of other brilliant people."
The author does mention that part of the process is collaboration with other musicians. It seems by setting their "chores" they are increasing their immersion.
Justin Vernon disappeared to a cabin in Wisconsin for months, where he wrote and recorded one of the greatest and most popular folk rock albums of all time.
I actually thought about that while writing the original comment as well. For Emma, Forever Ago is one of my all time favorite albums, good example of raw emotion with no need for any bells or whistles.
The big thing there is, that he already was a professional musician and completely inside a creative scene before leaving for the cabin. (DeYarmond Edison was the band he was in before Bon Iver.)
But yes, things were going way sideways for him, liver issues with mono, so he went to process whatever was going on and had been going on in complete isolation. (Although for the next album, he actually set up a whole "creative commune", a new band around Bon Iver instead of it being just himself, and so on. And I think you can hear the colors he wanted back in the music from it directly.)
A lot of examples of artists going into bouts of isolation, but almost always coming into it from an intense experience. So, the two don't have to be day to day intertwined, although for Techno specifically it's usually the case.
Did he not listen to music made by others when he was isolated in the cabin?
Most likely he made the album normally and the story about the cabin was made up by jimmy and bob from the marketing department.
Could great works substitute for having a scene? After all, writers have been inspired by Dostoevsky without being part of the same scene as him, and often without being part of a scene at all.
Which great writers are you thinking of here? True outsider art is very rare afaik.
Close contact between exceptional individuals is one of the main values of having a scene.
This lines up with my own experience with writing and (more recently) blogging.
You get over the fear of writing by doing a LOT of it, until you get to a point where writing a story or blog post stops feeling "special" and becomes just another thing you do. Each individual piece of writing stops feeling like an important work of art that you must get right at any cost, and becomes more like doing the dishes or taking out the garbage.
You can then separate the act of creating from the act of curating and editing. I regularly cut thousands of words from my writing before I share in public. I regularly throw away (well, archive) fully written drafts because I don't like them. A few years ago, this would've been unimaginable. Today, it feels like part of the process.
At some point, you gain confidence that you'll always have another story, another blog post, another poem inside you. If the current thing sucks, you just write another thing, and another, and another, until something clicks. It's freeing.
IME when creative work starts feeling like "just a job" is EXACTLY when it also becomes most fulfilling and satisfying.
I've heard this sentiment repeated and I believe it, but at least the purpose of my own blog is to communicate insights I've had. I almost make a point out of not blogging unless I feel that I have something truly interesting to share. It seems that flipping that around would come at a price.
Come think it, I feel that I have on the other side of this many times: I read a post or watch a video that opens up something in my brain and I get a sort of crush on the author. I read everything they write or watch all their videos. For some authors, I retain interest. But for others, where it seems like they produce regularly in order to maintain the frequency, I lose interest.
> I've heard this sentiment repeated and I believe it, but at least the purpose of my own blog is to communicate insights I've had. I almost make a point out of not blogging unless I feel that I have something truly interesting to share. It seems that flipping that around would come at a price.
That's where the editing and curation step comes in, at least for me. I write a lot more than I publish. If my writing:publishing ratio ever became 1:1, I'll stop publishing things that are interesting and insightful (well, interesting and insightful to me personally; other people might judge my writing differently).
Sometimes what works for me is to write something and let it sit in my drafts for a few days. Then if I read it back and still find it worth sharing, I polish it and hit the publish button. If not, it goes into a folder called "Retired" in my Obsidian.
The meaning of this is dismayingly slippery. You're presumably being creative and enjoying it, for all this "just a job".
> Routines might be a better name, but I like how action-oriented and well defined "chore" sounds.
The article's use of "boring" is somewhat misleading too, I think. It's trendy to say that being bored is good, but really that's always about enjoying patience, not about experiencing drudgery and having a miserable time.
Like with so many other artistic things, people can have very different workflows. Some people need to produce a lot of material, consistently, and then filter out. Stephen King is known for having such a workflow. Others will only produce when they find the motivation, and can go for long periods without producing anything.
In the end, whatever works for you.
A lot of my hobbyist musician friends were way more prolific during covid. The extra time seemed to have unlocked their ability to be way more creative to de-stress. I myself had a burst of activity recording music and improving my guitar technique for a couple of years.Sadly it dipped again post covid. However, more recently I'm trying to find a middle ground with AI cutting corners with the boring repeatable stuff of audio engineering and shifting focus to the creative and the technique. Feels like things have turned the corner here and I can get a pretty professional mix out quick without sacrificing my creativity. I love that middle ground where AI is truly helping me accelerate my output as a hired gun that mixes my sound while the calluses and note selections/ arrangement are all mine.
can you say a bit more about how AI is helping you mix?
do you tell it "make the bass louder", or does it actually listen to the audio and goes "hmm, too much highs on the pad, let me turn them down a bit"
I’ve been a recording musician for 28 years. Making music a boring chore is not the answer. The best musicians do two things: learn to turn off the over-thinking part of the brain that blocks creativity and second, understand music theory in depth for when that fails and you get stuck.
I find something quite bleak about this.
The joy of participating in music, to me, is one of the few domains where we can still, to an extent, hide away from the relentless enclosure and commodification of every facet of our existence in the name of capitalist value extraction. Imagining oneself as an assembly line in order to rush past the experience of the creative process and arrive as quickly as possible at a finished artifact — to me this is an act of submission. It is accepting that one's market value as a musician, as measured by the number and popularity of commodities they produce, is of vastly greater importance than the depth and quality of their musical experiences, than any joy, pleasure, satisfaction, connection, growth, expression, or catharsis they experience through their participation in music.
I have no doubt this is an effective way to end up with a bunch of finished tracks. But I can't help but feel that it is missing the point.
> I have no doubt this is an effective way to end up with a bunch of finished tracks. But I can't help but feel that it is missing the point.
It depends what your goal is - if your goal is to have an enjoyable hobby, then yes, it's probably missing the point.
If your goal is to have the best outputs, then that might involve a different creative process.
If your goal is to make (good amounts of) money, then the popularity of your music is actually important. Writing music that will be popular is a skill in itself, which is probably a different skill to just writing the music that you find the most joy and satisfaction in writing. Writing music that brings you joy and hoping others find the same joy in it might work, but I suspect the musicians making the most money are often working hard to write what the market wants/accepts rather than just what brings them the most joy. There will be exceptions to every rule however.
I absolutely agree.
My consternation comes from the fact that we seem, culturally, to have arrived at a place where we value the creation of music (or rather, musical artifacts) in the service of gaining something (fame and profit, primarily) over enjoyment of the experience of music.
It's now even simpler to "become a musician"; just enter some text and press "generate".
No further need to learn to play like these crazy guys: https://rochus-keller.ch/?p=973