Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

EXPLODODOG t1_j2mnged wrote

There was a similar feeling in the late 70s/early 80s when synthesizers became popular inexpensive replacements for live musicians during concert tours. It is easier to use a keyboard player instead of a set of strings or horns. The musicians unions were upset about that. Neil Young wrote a song called "Union Man" about that which included the line: "Live music is better / bumper stickers should be issued."

It kind of shifts back and forth even now. McCartney has toured in recent years with a live brass section whereas he had mainly used synths during the 80s-2010ish. Every now and then Brian Wilson would travel with entire string and horn sections, but sometimes not and just use synths. I think there are plenty of other examples from that era of music, too.

I'm bummed those folks are about at the end of their career... Getting to see them (especially Wilson) with all those instruments on stage was pretty incredible.

27

suffaluffapussycat t1_j2n33b8 wrote

Yeah, it’s funny how synthesizers had a bad rap in the ‘70s.

My dad took me to see a Moog demonstration at a local music store in about ‘78. My dad loved all kinds of gee-whiz futurology stuff. He wasn’t a musician but I was.

The guy from Moog had a whole spiel about how people should keep an open mind because Moogs didn’t have a “sound” and that they could sound like anything: a violin or a flute (then he would demonstrate these sounds). Which is hilarious because Moogs never sold in great numbers because of their accuracy at mimicking other instruments; they’re popular specifically for the Moog sound.

I recall reading a story about very early rhythm machines that were made to accompany live musicians and I think there was talk of placing a tariff on such items with the proceeds going to support union musicians.

21

fraghawk t1_j2nv0ck wrote

>recall reading a story about very early rhythm machines that were made to accompany live musicians and I think there was talk of placing a tariff on such items with the proceeds going to support union musicians.

And then you had guys like Phil Collins who saw increased success after figuring out "I can use these drum machines for their weird sounds and computerized precision while I simultaneously keep physically druming."

6

EXPLODODOG t1_j30e13t wrote

I don't think the point of any of this is to criticize the technology or the unique ways it could be used to create something new. All of the greatest artists used tech advancements for that purpose. The issue people had was when they used the technology to replace actual players with instruments. A human string quartet is always going to sound greater than a synthesized version

1