Do you disregard all electronic musicians as not musicians or just those who use other people's music? If it's the latter, PLEASE, since you've been sidestepping it for the whole thread, tell me why a sampler, or a laptop used as one, is not an instrument?
chiefly those who exclusively use other people's music. they are not musicians, just artists. just like a novelist is not a musician and a sculptor is not a poet.
these are not instruments, because instruments form songs. you play a note on a guitar, then another, and you build a song. or daft punk builds each beat and instrument note by note into a song. it's close enough because they are crafting an original song one note and tone and sound at a time. or kanye samples in between beats and add lyrics of his own to form his own song, an original artistic creation.
this guy presses play on his computer, and somebody else's song begins playing, note for note. he did not create any of it, just lifted it wholesale from another artist. then he presses stop and plays another song. maybe there's some tinkering to get them to blend into each other. but that's like being the tracer (little chasing amy reference for you ). he does not produce any music of his own. daft punk does. kanye west does. he simply takes musical compositions of other people and edits them together. there is talent in that, and it sounds cool as hell. but he is not a musician because he does not make any contribution to the music, as daft punk and kanye west do, even when they use samplers and computers. he just takes music others have made and edits it together to sound cool.
it's like saying the guy who makes commercials for a movie is the same as the director who controlled and created and filmed the movie itself.
i'll distill briefly to clarify. a guitarist plucks a note. it makes a sound. daft punk, punches a key, it makes a sound. this guy does not do that. he presses a button and a song plays. there is no creation of a song by individual sound. he just plays a fully formed song. that is the distinction to me.
chiefly those who exclusively use other people's music. they are not musicians, just artists. just like a novelist is not a musician and a sculptor is not a poet.
these are not instruments, because instruments form songs. you play a note on a guitar, then another, and you build a song. or daft punk builds each beat and instrument note by note into a song. it's close enough because they are crafting an original song one note and tone and sound at a time. or kanye samples in between beats and add lyrics of his own to form his own song, an original artistic creation.
this guy presses play on his computer, and somebody else's song begins playing, note for note. he did not create any of it, just lifted it wholesale from another artist. then he presses stop and plays another song. maybe there's some tinkering to get them to blend into each other. but that's like being the tracer (little chasing amy reference for you ). he does not produce any music of his own. daft punk does. kanye west does. he simply takes musical compositions of other people and edits them together. there is talent in that, and it sounds cool as hell. but he is not a musician because he does not make any contribution to the music, as daft punk and kanye west do, even when they use samplers and computers. he just takes music others have made and edits it together to sound cool.
it's like saying the guy who makes commercials for a movie is the same as the director who controlled and created and filmed the movie itself.
i'll distill briefly to clarify. a guitarist plucks a note. it makes a sound. daft punk, punches a key, it makes a sound. this guy does not do that. he presses a button and a song plays. there is no creation of a song by individual sound. he just plays a fully formed song. that is the distinction to me.
OK THIS MAY BLOW YOUR MIND, BUT DAFT PUNK IS PRACTICALLY ALL SAMPLES!
Also, did you see what I said? You have to have musical knowledge to do this so change the pitch, key, time signature...it's not as easy as you make it out to be.
And I like how you didn't even respond to my last reply.
jeez guys... didnt intend to start some music integrity battle... greg doesnt claim to have written any of this stuff by himself and its all in good fun... go see him live... im not gonna say hes an "artist" but he sure puts on a great show and its the best party soundtrack out there
Art is Art. Girl Talk is art. It take a good amount of skill to mix like he does.
He is taking these songs and changing them, manipulating them, and skewing them into something completely different. Sure it's not like a classical composition, but he definitely makes them his own and it's very unique.
Plus I saw him at Lolla and he was awesome and fun as hell
If you don't like it, don't listen to it, but don't for the love of god tell me Kid Rock is more of musician than him. A musician is an artist and art is an expression. Kid Rock expresses himself through bullshit rock-country-rap stuff that hasn't been popular since 1997 while Girl Talk expresses himself through extremely clever and thoughtout mashups.
And you're saying that Eddie Van Halen's guitar playing has no soul? Yeah, your opinion is now void.
Lol -- I highly doubt that Girl Talk is expressing himself through his art. He found a way to make a lot of money in a short period of time because he understands that 99% of people really don't give a shit about music and that those 99% would eat up short clips of popular songs while they were drinking at a bar.
It's a great way to make money. None of this shit has any staying power or is any kind of contribution to music in general and at the end of the day, he's rich and people are still stupid.
1/12/1879, 4/8/1156, 2/6/1977, who gives a shit, ...
Lol -- I highly doubt that Girl Talk is expressing himself through his art. He found a way to make a lot of money in a short period of time because he understands that 99% of people really don't give a shit about music and that those 99% would eat up short clips of popular songs while they were drinking at a bar.
It's a great way to make money. None of this shit has any staying power or is any kind of contribution to music in general and at the end of the day, he's rich and people are still stupid.
LOL! Rich? What makes you think he is rich? Just because he is a musician doesn't mean he is rich. He released his newest album online with a pick how much you pay deal. He also has a degree in biomedical enginneering.
And your whole argument is people are stupid? That's the dumbest thing I've read on the message board today.
By expressing himself I'm just saying that he is a musician except he uses samples the same way EVERY DJ does and even DAFT PUNK does. Just because they don't compose the music doesn't mean they aren't musicians. They just utilize other peoples music and shape it to creat it their own. ZEPPELIN DID THE SAME THING WITH OLD BLUES SONGS. Almost every band has songs derivative from other artists.
LOL! Rich? What makes you think he is rich? Just because he is a musician doesn't mean he is rich. He released his newest album online with a pick how much you pay deal. He also has a degree in biomedical enginneering.
And your whole argument is people are stupid? That's the dumbest thing I've read on the message board today.
By expressing himself I'm just saying that he is a musician except he uses samples the same way EVERY DJ does and even DAFT PUNK does. Just because they don't compose the music doesn't mean they aren't musicians. They just utilize other peoples music and shape it to creat it their own. ZEPPELIN DID THE SAME THING WITH OLD BLUES SONGS. Almost every band has songs derivative from other artists.
"Good artists borrow. Great artists steal."
Wow I have a degree in electrical engineering. Does that mean that I get instant respect if I cut and paste clips from Sweet Child of Mine with 2 Legit to Quit? That sounds like a good deal.
These songs are meant to be bar songs. There's nothing wrong with that but don't try and say that the music comes from the same place as music from artists who write their own stuff. The guy is smart and he knows what the masses want and he feeds it to them on a catchy platter.
1/12/1879, 4/8/1156, 2/6/1977, who gives a shit, ...
To be able to mix like he does and use stuff in the same key, time signature, and etc takes musical knowledge and ability.
He is a musician. Just he utilizes electonic samples rather than standard instruments. So you're telling me that Vladimir Ussachevsky, Paul Lansky, Pauline Oliveros, and Laurie Anderson are not musicians?
And I never said that what Kid Rock wasn't art. I just said his art is rock-country-rap stuff. Please re-read what I said.
i don't know who any of those people are, so i can't say. i didn't know that about daft punk. they just fell into girl talk category for me then. only they at least get credit for using semi-obscure songs to build their tunes from. girl talk seems to have just bought the entire NOW cd collection and pasted them together to make music for drunk people at a party to go "oh i love this tune!" while they rock out to the chorus/hook and then go back to figuring out which girl gets their rufie tonight.
and no, it doesnt. i can tell when a song makes a jarring transition in timing. does that make me a musician even though i can't play shit for instruments? he's it takes a certain artistic and aesthetic sensibility. but this makes him an artist, like i said. not a musician. just like playing with photoshop or clip-art on a computer does not make you a painter or photographer if you're just altering the work of others.
i don't know who any of those people are, so i can't say. i didn't know that about daft punk. they just fell into girl talk category for me then. only they at least get credit for using semi-obscure songs to build their tunes from. girl talk seems to have just bought the entire NOW cd collection and pasted them together to make music for drunk people at a party to go "oh i love this tune!" while they rock out to the chorus/hook and then go back to figuring out which girl gets their rufie tonight.
Great way to sterotype all Girl Talk fans.
Bars music? Pearl Jam is far more bar music than Girl Talk. I'm positive I've seen more drunken asshole frat guys at a Pearl Jam show than a Girl Talk show.
Bars music? Pearl Jam is far more bar music than Girl Talk. I'm positive I've seen more drunken asshole frat guys at a Pearl Jam show than a Girl Talk show.
im quite certain you're right. my bad. girl talk fans are not the drunk frat boy type. they're the wannabe hipster types who want to feel cool by listening to obscure bands but are actually suburban crackers who want nothing more than a good bon jovi tune. girl talk allows them to listen to the music they actually like by packaging it in a form that won't get them ridiculed by their hipster friends. they can hear their hit pop songs and not have to admit they like them because it's playing on a girl talk album instead of kelly clarkston's album.
if i photoshop a van gogh painting on my computer, does that make me a painter like van gogh was? so why would 'photo-shopping' other people's music on a computer make one a musician? because people will pay to see me do it in real time?
im quite certain you're right. i hope you've enjoyed meeting the kettle, mr pot. since i took such time to answer your post like you wanted and you refused to respond to any of my points.
if i photoshop a van gogh painting on my computer, does that make me a painter like van gogh was? so why would 'photo-shopping' other people's music on a computer make one a musician?
That is completely different.
It all comes down to if you think a DJ is a musician. Sampling is a new form of creating music. Girl Talk creates new songs by taking pieces of other songs and splicing them together so that they form new pieces. Ever heard of a collage?
Collage is an art form just how today, DJ-ing is a form of musicianship. Sure it's not the classic way of a musicianship in terms of plugging in a guitar or bangning on a drum, but a form of electronic music. It's not as easy as just pressing play on iTunes. Like I said many times you have to change the pitch of songs(like Kanye does), or shift a time signature, or find songs in the same key. It's like The Beatles' Love album...that was done in a collage way...was that not music? Girl Talk does not have jarring transisitons in any of his songs and if he did then it would take away from what he is trying to do.
So whatever. Obviously if you don't think DJs are musicians then my argument is moot. I guess it's up to the ear of the beholder.
And what is the deal with sterotyping fans? Who gives a shit who listens? That's a red herring agrument.
It all comes down to if you think a DJ is a musician. Sampling is a new form of creating music. Girl Talk creates new songs by taking pieces of other songs and splicing them together so that they form new pieces. Ever heard of a collage?
Collage is an art form just how today, DJ-ing is a form of musicianship. Sure it's not the classic way of a musicianship in terms of plugging in a guitar or bangning on a drum, but a form of electronic music. It's not as easy as just pressing play on iTunes. Like I said many times you have to change the pitch of songs(like Kanye does), or shift a time signature, or find songs in the same key. It's like The Beatles' Love album...that was done in a collage way...was that not music? Girl Talk does not have jarring transisitons in any of his songs and if he did then it would take away from what he is trying to do.
So whatever. Obviously if you don't think DJs are musicians then my argument is moot. I guess it's up to the ear of the beholder.
And what is the deal with sterotyping fans? Who gives a shit who listens? That's a red herring agrument.
the beatles love album was music, but the people who put it together were artists, not musicians.
how is my analogy different? explain it to me. you can't just say it is different.
collages ARE art. those who make them ARE artists. but they are not PAINTERS. painters paint things. musicians play musical instruments. sculptors sculpt things. a collage comes out a picture, just like a dj creates a musical song. but the collage maker is not a painter just because he made paintings into an original picture, just like a dj is not a musician just because he turned other people's musical into an original song.
collage is an artform, and so is being a dj. but the guy who makes a collage is not a painter or sculptor and the guy who dj's is not a musician.
the beatles love album was music, but the people who put it together were artists, not musicians.
how is my analogy different? explain it to me. you can't just say it is different.
collages ARE art. those who make them ARE artists. but they are not PAINTERS. painters paint things. musicians play musical instruments. sculptors sculpt things. a collage comes out a picture, just like a dj creates a musical song. but the collage maker is not a painter just because he made paintings into an original picture, just like a dj is not a musician just because he turned other people's musical into an original song.
See here is a lapse in logic. You are saying a collage artists are not painters. Duh. I'm not saying a DJ is a guitarist or a drummer, but they are musicians.
And you can be an artist and use photoshop. ALOT of art today is graphic design which is all done on computers. So yocan photoshop stuff and it be art. Anything can be art really.
Anyway, I'm done with this argument. You obviously don't think DJ-ing is a form of musicianship and are pretty stubborn about it so I'm not going to try to change your mind.
It all comes down to if you think a DJ is a musician. Sampling is a new form of creating music. Girl Talk creates new songs by taking pieces of other songs and splicing them together so that they form new pieces. Ever heard of a collage?
Collage is an art form just how today, DJ-ing is a form of musicianship. Sure it's not the classic way of a musicianship in terms of plugging in a guitar or bangning on a drum, but a form of electronic music. It's not as easy as just pressing play on iTunes. Like I said many times you have to change the pitch of songs(like Kanye does), or shift a time signature, or find songs in the same key. It's like The Beatles' Love album...that was done in a collage way...was that not music? Girl Talk does not have jarring transisitons in any of his songs and if he did then it would take away from what he is trying to do.
So whatever. Obviously if you don't think DJs are musicians then my argument is moot. I guess it's up to the ear of the beholder.
And what is the deal with sterotyping fans? Who gives a shit who listens? That's a red herring agrument.
Girl Talk is a just a modern day Jive Bunny. You must have been at a wedding where those Jive Bunny medleys are played and every time the song clip changes various people go "woooo!". It's the same thing with these Girl Talk tracks. It will be played to death at the bar and various people on the dance floor will go "woo!" when they recognize a song clip. Can you actually imagine somebody deciding that they want to listen to music putting this shit on? This stuff is all about short attention spans.
1/12/1879, 4/8/1156, 2/6/1977, who gives a shit, ...
See here is a lapse in logic. You are saying a collage artists are not painters. Duh. I'm not saying a DJ is a guitarist or a drummer, but they are musicians.
and i am saying a musician has to play some sort of musical instrument. and a computer is not a musical instrument. you don't say a computer is a pen and paper just because it has ms word on it.
And you can be an artist and use photoshop. ALOT of art today is graphic design which is all done on computers. So yocan photoshop stuff and it be art. Anything can be art really.
where have i ever argued with this? i've been saying this since point one.
Anyway, I'm done with this argument. You obviously don't think DJ-ing is a form of musicianship and are pretty stubborn about it so I'm not going to try to change your mind.
no, i dont. i think dj's are artists. but i don't consider them musicians. and while i can appreciate the work of dj's (see daft punk, or prodigy), i don't think girl talk is anywhere near genius level. girl talk is to being a dj what goo goo dolls are to rock and roll.
and i am saying a musician has to play some sort of musical instrument. and a computer is not a musical instrument.
One last thing. This i don't agree with. So a computerized synthesizer is not an instrument? By saying a computer is no an instrument you are discounting countless electonic musicians.
In Radiohead's Idioteque they sample a Paul Lansky song and Johnny plays a sequencer. Are they not being musicians in that band?
One last thing. This i don't agree with. So a computerized synthesizer is not an instrument? By saying a computer is no an instrument you are discounting countless electonic musicians.
In Radiohead's Idioteque they sample a Paul Lansky song and Johnny plays a sequencer. Are they not being musicians in that band?
they are, because johnny plays musical instruments. i'm not sure i know what a computerized synthesizer is or how it works.
my vision of this is my old college roommate, who would basically just sit there and play with itunes or some such program. not a musical bone in his body, but damn if he couldn't tinker with things on his computer. maybe there have been advances in the field since then.
i'll distill briefly to clarify. a guitarist plucks a note. it makes a sound. daft punk, punches a key, it makes a sound. this guy does not do that. he presses a button and a song plays. there is no creation of a song by individual sound. he just plays a fully formed song. that is the distinction to me.
How is a keyboard any more musical? it's a synthetic sound triggered by a button, same as a sampler or computer.
If you think this guy has literally just recorded one song over another with no manipulation and use of his own creative imagination, listen again and realise how daft you sound.
You know professionaly keyboards? The one's where the instruments are actual sampled recordings? When a keyboard player plays that key, the sound that comes out is a recording made by a person playing a piano, saxophone, vibraphone, marimba, drum, flute, cor anglais, whatever.
HOW is it any different?
"I remember one night at Muzdalifa with nothing but the sky overhead, I lay awake amid sleeping Muslim brothers and I learned that pilgrims from every land — every colour, and class, and rank; high officials and the beggar alike — all snored in the same language"
How is a keyboard any more musical? it's a synthetic sound triggered by a button, same as a sampler or computer.
If you think this guy has literally just recorded one song over another with no manipulation and use of his own creative imagination, listen again and realise how daft you sound.
You know professionaly keyboards? The one's where the instruments are actual sampled recordings? When a keyboard player plays that key, the sound that comes out is a recording made by a person playing a piano, saxophone, vibraphone, marimba, drum, flute, cor anglais, whatever.
HOW is it any different?
they're still playing a song note by note. not pressing play on a fully formed song.
basically, my standard is if i can do it, then the dude's not a musician. with the right computer program and an instruction manual i can build the songs he has and create them on my own on my computer just by twirling a few buttons. but i cannot play the simplest song on guitar, harmonica, recorder, or whatever other instrument you like.
i don't know what this synthesizer machine is, maybe it's getting closer to a real instrument. but this dude's album sounds like he sat on his computer and spliced a ton of songs together, like me editing my porn vids (start here, now stop, now clip, now add... voila... greatest hits of keri sable/90s pop music! ). if i knew someone would pay to listen to that, i'd have been paying more attention to what my roommate was doing in college.
they're still playing a song note by note. not pressing play on a fully formed song.
basically, my standard is if i can do it, then the dude's not a musician. with the right computer program and an instruction manual i can build the songs he has and create them on my own on my computer just by twirling a few buttons. but i cannot play the simplest song on guitar, harmonica, recorder, or whatever other instrument you like.
i don't know what this synthesizer machine is, maybe it's getting closer to a real instrument. but this dude's album sounds like he sat on his computer and spliced a ton of songs together, like me editing my porn vids (start here, now stop, now clip, now add... voila... greatest hits of keri sable/90s pop music! ). if i knew someone would pay to listen to that, i'd have been paying more attention to what my roommate was doing in college.
You don't know what a synthesizer is?
And if you could made stuff like Girl Talk, then go ahead. Like I said, it's not as easy as you make it out to be.
Comments
chiefly those who exclusively use other people's music. they are not musicians, just artists. just like a novelist is not a musician and a sculptor is not a poet.
these are not instruments, because instruments form songs. you play a note on a guitar, then another, and you build a song. or daft punk builds each beat and instrument note by note into a song. it's close enough because they are crafting an original song one note and tone and sound at a time. or kanye samples in between beats and add lyrics of his own to form his own song, an original artistic creation.
this guy presses play on his computer, and somebody else's song begins playing, note for note. he did not create any of it, just lifted it wholesale from another artist. then he presses stop and plays another song. maybe there's some tinkering to get them to blend into each other. but that's like being the tracer (little chasing amy reference for you
it's like saying the guy who makes commercials for a movie is the same as the director who controlled and created and filmed the movie itself.
i'll distill briefly to clarify. a guitarist plucks a note. it makes a sound. daft punk, punches a key, it makes a sound. this guy does not do that. he presses a button and a song plays. there is no creation of a song by individual sound. he just plays a fully formed song. that is the distinction to me.
OK THIS MAY BLOW YOUR MIND, BUT DAFT PUNK IS PRACTICALLY ALL SAMPLES!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJPdVVOmbz4
Also, did you see what I said? You have to have musical knowledge to do this so change the pitch, key, time signature...it's not as easy as you make it out to be.
And I like how you didn't even respond to my last reply.
Lil Wayne is better than Pearl Jam.
Bitches ain't nothin' but hoes 'n tricks
http://seanbriceart.com/
It's a great way to make money. None of this shit has any staying power or is any kind of contribution to music in general and at the end of the day, he's rich and people are still stupid.
LOL! Rich? What makes you think he is rich? Just because he is a musician doesn't mean he is rich. He released his newest album online with a pick how much you pay deal. He also has a degree in biomedical enginneering.
And your whole argument is people are stupid? That's the dumbest thing I've read on the message board today.
By expressing himself I'm just saying that he is a musician except he uses samples the same way EVERY DJ does and even DAFT PUNK does. Just because they don't compose the music doesn't mean they aren't musicians. They just utilize other peoples music and shape it to creat it their own. ZEPPELIN DID THE SAME THING WITH OLD BLUES SONGS. Almost every band has songs derivative from other artists.
"Good artists borrow. Great artists steal."
Lil Wayne is better than Pearl Jam.
Bitches ain't nothin' but hoes 'n tricks
These songs are meant to be bar songs. There's nothing wrong with that but don't try and say that the music comes from the same place as music from artists who write their own stuff. The guy is smart and he knows what the masses want and he feeds it to them on a catchy platter.
i don't know who any of those people are, so i can't say. i didn't know that about daft punk. they just fell into girl talk category for me then. only they at least get credit for using semi-obscure songs to build their tunes from. girl talk seems to have just bought the entire NOW cd collection and pasted them together to make music for drunk people at a party to go "oh i love this tune!" while they rock out to the chorus/hook and then go back to figuring out which girl gets their rufie tonight.
and no, it doesnt. i can tell when a song makes a jarring transition in timing. does that make me a musician even though i can't play shit for instruments? he's it takes a certain artistic and aesthetic sensibility. but this makes him an artist, like i said. not a musician. just like playing with photoshop or clip-art on a computer does not make you a painter or photographer if you're just altering the work of others.
Great way to sterotype all Girl Talk fans.
Bars music? Pearl Jam is far more bar music than Girl Talk. I'm positive I've seen more drunken asshole frat guys at a Pearl Jam show than a Girl Talk show.
Lil Wayne is better than Pearl Jam.
Bitches ain't nothin' but hoes 'n tricks
im quite certain you're right. my bad. girl talk fans are not the drunk frat boy type. they're the wannabe hipster types who want to feel cool by listening to obscure bands but are actually suburban crackers who want nothing more than a good bon jovi tune. girl talk allows them to listen to the music they actually like by packaging it in a form that won't get them ridiculed by their hipster friends. they can hear their hit pop songs and not have to admit they like them because it's playing on a girl talk album instead of kelly clarkston's album.
if i photoshop a van gogh painting on my computer, does that make me a painter like van gogh was? so why would 'photo-shopping' other people's music on a computer make one a musician? because people will pay to see me do it in real time?
That is completely different.
It all comes down to if you think a DJ is a musician. Sampling is a new form of creating music. Girl Talk creates new songs by taking pieces of other songs and splicing them together so that they form new pieces. Ever heard of a collage?
Is this art: http://www.artasauthority.com/images/Joey%20Burns.jpg
Or this: http://www.poprockart.com/images/glow.jpg
What about this one: http://www.gregpalast.com/madhouseposter.jpg
Collage is an art form just how today, DJ-ing is a form of musicianship. Sure it's not the classic way of a musicianship in terms of plugging in a guitar or bangning on a drum, but a form of electronic music. It's not as easy as just pressing play on iTunes. Like I said many times you have to change the pitch of songs(like Kanye does), or shift a time signature, or find songs in the same key. It's like The Beatles' Love album...that was done in a collage way...was that not music? Girl Talk does not have jarring transisitons in any of his songs and if he did then it would take away from what he is trying to do.
So whatever. Obviously if you don't think DJs are musicians then my argument is moot. I guess it's up to the ear of the beholder.
And what is the deal with sterotyping fans? Who gives a shit who listens? That's a red herring agrument.
Lil Wayne is better than Pearl Jam.
Bitches ain't nothin' but hoes 'n tricks
the beatles love album was music, but the people who put it together were artists, not musicians.
how is my analogy different? explain it to me. you can't just say it is different.
collages ARE art. those who make them ARE artists. but they are not PAINTERS. painters paint things. musicians play musical instruments. sculptors sculpt things. a collage comes out a picture, just like a dj creates a musical song. but the collage maker is not a painter just because he made paintings into an original picture, just like a dj is not a musician just because he turned other people's musical into an original song.
collage is an artform, and so is being a dj. but the guy who makes a collage is not a painter or sculptor and the guy who dj's is not a musician.
See here is a lapse in logic. You are saying a collage artists are not painters. Duh. I'm not saying a DJ is a guitarist or a drummer, but they are musicians.
And you can be an artist and use photoshop. ALOT of art today is graphic design which is all done on computers. So yocan photoshop stuff and it be art. Anything can be art really.
Anyway, I'm done with this argument. You obviously don't think DJ-ing is a form of musicianship and are pretty stubborn about it so I'm not going to try to change your mind.
Lil Wayne is better than Pearl Jam.
Bitches ain't nothin' but hoes 'n tricks
Girl Talk is a just a modern day Jive Bunny. You must have been at a wedding where those Jive Bunny medleys are played and every time the song clip changes various people go "woooo!". It's the same thing with these Girl Talk tracks. It will be played to death at the bar and various people on the dance floor will go "woo!" when they recognize a song clip. Can you actually imagine somebody deciding that they want to listen to music putting this shit on? This stuff is all about short attention spans.
and i am saying a musician has to play some sort of musical instrument. and a computer is not a musical instrument. you don't say a computer is a pen and paper just because it has ms word on it.
where have i ever argued with this? i've been saying this since point one.
no, i dont. i think dj's are artists. but i don't consider them musicians. and while i can appreciate the work of dj's (see daft punk, or prodigy), i don't think girl talk is anywhere near genius level. girl talk is to being a dj what goo goo dolls are to rock and roll.
chicago rules. we probably know each other, hehe.
One last thing. This i don't agree with. So a computerized synthesizer is not an instrument? By saying a computer is no an instrument you are discounting countless electonic musicians.
In Radiohead's Idioteque they sample a Paul Lansky song and Johnny plays a sequencer. Are they not being musicians in that band?
Lil Wayne is better than Pearl Jam.
Bitches ain't nothin' but hoes 'n tricks
they are, because johnny plays musical instruments.
my vision of this is my old college roommate, who would basically just sit there and play with itunes or some such program. not a musical bone in his body, but damn if he couldn't tinker with things on his computer. maybe there have been advances in the field since then.
If you think this guy has literally just recorded one song over another with no manipulation and use of his own creative imagination, listen again and realise how daft you sound.
You know professionaly keyboards? The one's where the instruments are actual sampled recordings? When a keyboard player plays that key, the sound that comes out is a recording made by a person playing a piano, saxophone, vibraphone, marimba, drum, flute, cor anglais, whatever.
HOW is it any different?
they're still playing a song note by note. not pressing play on a fully formed song.
basically, my standard is if i can do it, then the dude's not a musician. with the right computer program and an instruction manual i can build the songs he has and create them on my own on my computer just by twirling a few buttons. but i cannot play the simplest song on guitar, harmonica, recorder, or whatever other instrument you like.
i don't know what this synthesizer machine is, maybe it's getting closer to a real instrument. but this dude's album sounds like he sat on his computer and spliced a ton of songs together, like me editing my porn vids (start here, now stop, now clip, now add... voila... greatest hits of keri sable/90s pop music!
You don't know what a synthesizer is?
And if you could made stuff like Girl Talk, then go ahead. Like I said, it's not as easy as you make it out to be.
Lil Wayne is better than Pearl Jam.
Bitches ain't nothin' but hoes 'n tricks
i thought i did, but based on you and jeremy's description, it might not be exactly what i think.
i did make something like Girl Talk once. let me find my power hour cd