Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site FLAIRMAX.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!decwrl!FLAIRMAX!ellis
From: ellis@FLAIRMAX.UUCP (Michael Ellis)
Newsgroups: net.music
Subject: Re: studios
Message-ID: <204@FLAIRMAX.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 9-Sep-83 01:10:30 EDT
Article-I.D.: FLAIRMAX.204
Posted: Fri Sep  9 01:10:30 1983
Date-Received: Sat, 3-Sep-83 17:29:50 EDT
Organization: Fairchild AI Lab, Palo Alto, CA
Lines: 28

Sorry if my statement about `hi-tech elitism' suggested a total putdown
of expensive production techniques, but the feeling is a reaction against
recent trends, as quoted below:

>  The sophistication of consumers of music has increased substantially in
>  the last few years. The playback equipment and the expectations of the
>  listeners have reached a point that it is near impossible to produce an
>  acceptable result with a four-track machine.

The advanced technical sophistication of much recent music is, of course,
not inherently bad. It's just that some of the best new stuff, like punk
and third world music, or just garage bands of any kind, is made by people 
who don't have access to expensive crap.

Pop artists who are innovative with expensive technology can be interesting
provided they don't lose sight of the real goal, which is to make music,
Even so, their innovations are beyond the means of many 18 year old rowdies
who have traditionally been the life blood of R&R. To that extent, hi-tech
makes itself irrelevant.

When listeners are referred to as music consumers attempting to produce
acceptable results with sophisticated equipment, I am reminded that the
audience here does, in fact, consist of upwardly mobile technocrats perhaps
more in tune with Human League than the Sex Pistols. If pop music becomes
overly saturated with music produceable only in big-money studios, I have
no doubt another `punk revolution' will be the natural result.

-michael `music by the people' ellis