Nature vs Synth

Tweet

I guess it's been more than 40 years since the technology started this snowball-like avalanche that triggered the dawn of the digital era and also has speeded up the overall development of all that means today IT, whether it was about computers themselves, what's working inside them, software or hardware, both daily used or exquisite expensive pieces of equipment people work and strive to buy for years. Even people have changed radically because of everything the digital era has brought with it, from human-interrelation to affective social assertion, the way we live has transformed in a manner never thought of as being possible some 60 or 70 years ago. It's definitely not my case to ask first what will finally prevail, “the digital everything” or the human/natural “rest”. The answer to this question is by no means possible, not even in 10 years or 25: in my humble opinion, I guess it has to pass a long time until the end and the odds of this so-called battle could be foreseen. As a matter of fact I guess that by simply saying “digital vs. human”, things are already being categorized. For such a long time people, partisans of either analog and digital have fought and fought for eliminating the “serios mistake” of speaking in the same terms about these two categories; and what for? Just to live and see that these days the issue and the centerfold question has changed once more? Of course not, as the respective supporters have wished, but according to what technology itself dictated. As is it also the case with food, sound and audio entertainment have been subjected more and more to a pressing question: what's better – synth or natural? I guess you have guessed by now that this separation is not between music using “natural” devices in order to produce sound and music made without any of these “technological enhancements”; it's all about something deeper, about having Totally Digital/Electronic music/entertainment compared to what we agree to call “natural” music. The question does not intend to hinder or diminish the broad appreciation artists like Jean-Michel Jarre or Jon Vangelis have; instead, it simply asks a predictable matter, whether it's OK or not to have so much almost “impersonal” music around us, regardless of genre, BPM and other such things. It may look like this is a question that old and old-fashioned people would ask; yet - believe me - this is an issue sociologists and anthropologists are giving a lot of thought to. It's not about music or entertainment but it's a matter of human evolution and social development. Therefore, a question like “are we going to become all digital?” may thus not seem that far out as it would have been in the first place... From the earliest “synth” made in 1876, down to the 1937 Electronic Keyboard Oboe, the Moog of the Mark II of the 50s and the late 60s Moog, everything just speeded up and the growth was almost exponential. Through the 90s General MIDI and finally to this month's Native Instruments' KORE release, the history looks like it's complete: we already don't need physical instruments any longer in order to make music that sounds almost exactly the same. Or do we? Last Saturday I was interviewing a very “technical” band whose last product was almost completely synthetic except for the live human vocal parts and – obviously - I asked the guys to tell me whether this was to be the new road for the band. The answer was a very decided NO; the product was way “too cold” and was to be looked at as an experiment rather than as a true product of the band. New and completely “synth” musical styles are already here and even the concept of music has been so much distorted under the “modern” and “performance” shields that such a transgression passed almost unnoticed; stuff like “breakcore” or “speedcore” simply take a lot of both “analog” and synth music, mix them together, add some more FX-ing and then output everything in a very “contemporary” way – there you go, the new music. Nevertheless, as I have asked if music will become fully digital, the sincere answer was as well “NO”. And even more, this answer was also founded and sustained by a very coherent theory which stated that even with the strongest synthesis software/hardware, the lack of the human touch and human imagination/creativity will definitely result in a very cold and hollow music. Almost everybody I have asked this question said that even if the “technics” somehow reached a very high level, it would eventually fall under its own “un-natural nature”. “Music has to come from the heart” said one of those with whom I had been speaking. “One of these days we will see that the technology (digital synthesis) will not suffice at all...and then we'll turn to the sound of nature and natural things”, he concluded. Still, it's been more than 800 words in this editorial so far and the problem isn't at all clearer than it was before; not because these words would be crap, but just because one simply can't be that drastic such as to declare himself for either of the “contestants” as winner and simply anticipate the future development of planetary musical history. I'd say that the only thing we could do is just listening to our fav music, whatever this may be and just wait and see what will come from now on. And just about now I realize I am listening to a very un-natural music on the radio... and this does not make me a different man; even though the questions I spoke about before pop up again in my mind... Be it synth or blocks of wood in the forest, I just know good music will never perish! source : news,softpedia.com