On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 07:11:23PM -0500, Paul Davis wrote: > On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 4:42 PM, <fons@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 04:24:07PM -0500, Paul Davis wrote: > > >> but if you're someone who writes soundtracks for ads, tv shows or > >> films, the tools available now totally outshine what was available > >> 10-15 years ago. and that part is not BS. > > > > True, but these are tools targeted at one particular type of output, > > whatever marketing demands at any time. People are already getting > > tired of overcompressed audio, re-aligned drums, and the endless > > repetition of the same cheap effects. Much of this will be obsolete > > sooner than you'd expect. > > i have 3 friends in the phila. area who do soundtrack and ad work. > they mostly layer their own performances on acoustic or electrical > instruments over rhythm tracks that they assemble from samples and > loops. they know all about the loudness wars, and it doesn't really > make much difference to them because their stuff is going to be merged > with voice-overs and FX work anyway, quite possibly ducked repeatedly. > they sometimes have to come up with 5 or 6 30 to 120 sec "pieces" in a > day, and tools that let them build rhythm tracks quickly, layer > repeated instances of their melodic/harmonic ideas throughout the > piece, quickly "master" it and move on are invaluable. > > why does this matter? they get paid more, and get paid more frequently > to do this kind of work than other musician friends of mine. their > music has a larger "audience", but its an audience that isn't actually > listening to what they do - their work merely provides color or > texture or (often) some kind of geographic reference to a visual > experience. the tools they rely on have been created for what i sense > is now one the of the most common paid jobs a musician can have today. > i would guess that more music is written for this purpose than > anything else in contemporary western culture. i could be wrong, but > it has to be a close 2nd :) > 'Twas ever thus. The main way for a musician to make a decent middle-class living 30 years ago, I'm told, was "jingles" (ad work) and soundtracks. Back then it was violin players, horn players, as well as those playing drums, guitars, and other rock-oriented instruments. > the interesting part is that they prefer to use a quite different > workflow when they switch into "self-expression" mode (i.e. actually > playing music that means something to them). Probably also true back then as well, but it'd have been more limited by price. The big studios were expensive and only available for commercial work, but a TASCAM 4-track was affordable. -ken _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
