Read on Twitter
Been checking in on old friends from the guitar band days and have been annoyed by this emerging trend among them as they have been transitioning into producer roles, investing in recording gear, and spending as much time in the DAW as the rest of us:
They all retain this weird fascination with authenticity being informed by how “live” something is, particularly with artists they like who are using samplers, MIDI controllers, etc. in the context of “guitar music” (lol sorry)
Sent some quality math rock to a different friend and he pointed out how their first record sounded “like a real band” ????? People have been overdubbing longer than some of our lifetimes combined. Seems idiotic to me to invest authenticity in the thought of real ness
I guess I’m saying this because I will def hype the superiority of a real 909 but make no mistake - it’s my own bullshit sense of taste that’s behind that. Maybe if my friend just said “love the mixdown on this early record” I’d probably have nothing to fume about rn.
My friend was showing me an artist he liked who was using sequencers and sampling, but he celebrated its value by focusing on the restrictive parameters the artist placed on themselves. “All their samples sounds have to be recorded in with the signal chain, no post-processing”
If there’s any parameter of artistic expression that will get me talking shit, it’s the idea of authenticity. Especially when it’s evoked as an inherent quality. If you wanna talk about gatekeeping, look no further than the manufacturing of authenticity
Why does that matter? Speaking as a huge fucking nerd, that shit should have no power over the expressive validity of music to an outsider. I certainly believe there is power in setting restrictions on yourself, but as a listener there isn’t really a reason I should care
(ESPECIALLY irt manufactured(!) music)
