Fucking originality

[Amøbe]

okay I don't know if this can even be a topic, but is there anyone besides me who get caught up in trying to be original, and then if you ever daaaaaare to try and replicate a style you get something much more satisfying out of it. What the fuck is up with that?

[Amøbe]

I guess this topic could be turned into the dangers of trying to distance yourself from everybody else.

[Mslwte]

I think im the opposite tbh. If I try and replicate i fail big time. If I just do my own thing I fail much less

Just do want comes naturally to you. If that means sounding like everyone else, so be it.enjoy the journey, don't think about the destination

[Lost to the Void]

I kinda don't care about anything other than just exploring music the way I want to.
It seems to be paying off too.

[Divjak]

Sometimes I get caught up in "IT HAZ TO BE INOVATION CAUZE ART" anime arc a lot. I always sucked at good production so I brainwashed myself into "its different and because of that its good" so take what I say with a lot of salt. I still think that if you make music at least try to do as much as possible yourself, I wasted a lot time doing so, but I have some ideas now how to make fx chain that sounds cool to me. So in practice, you will get the results you like by trial and error over the years. But in theory, by that i mean thinking about art abstract way, there is SOOO much more experiments to do.

[mervv]

okay I don't know if this can even be a topic, but is there anyone besides me who get caught up in trying to be original, and then if you ever daaaaaare to try and replicate a style you get something much more satisfying out of it. What the fuck is up with that?

Same thing happens to me. Also, ironically, a lot of the things I've made that I think are the most unique come from when I am trying to replicate something, but an idea in the moment takes me in a different direction.

I think all this is more a matter of skill than talent or genius. Very very few people (if any) are "talented," and I mean this in a good way. Skills mean you can use your tools to do what you want without thinking, like the tools become an extension of yourself and sometimes it feels like they're doing the thinking for you.

That is my theory for why this happens. When you at least start out trying to ape something else, you can apply yourself more easily and naturally because you're not in your head too much about "is this innovative/original enough??" You have a direction to start in, you can get into a nice flow, and then if something strikes your ears and tugs you in another direction, you're feeling loose and focused enough to follow it without stumbling. The less I think the better.

[mervv]

I got really anxious about making "boring" or "unoriginal" music several months ago. I immediately got totally creatively blocked and everything I made sounded like shit. I've been trying to undo the self-inflicted psychological damage since then :"(

[td3l]

I think that techno and adjacent genres have an obsession with "originality" which actually becomes detrimental. Similar to capitalism's unyielding demand for constant growth, in which no business can simply find its niche and maintain a steady-state profit margin while making a good product, the techno scene seems to reward those who are constantly pushing perceived boundaries. On paper this isn't necessarily a bad thing -- after all, this is a genre with deep roots in futurism, among other concepts. The trouble is, most of the boundary pushing these days feels like smoke and mirrors rather than true innovation; new timbres and plug-in tricks applied to the same old forms, often not particularly well. One need not look any further than the insane popularity of eurorack as the main production vehicle. How many stale/lifeless Blawan EPs are we going to collectively go through before we realize there's more to art than applying new technical tricks?

This genre is "only" 30 years old -- that's nothing. Most musical forms throughout history are passed along through literal generations. People spend entire lifetimes studying particular forms or instruments. In techno, people tend to grasp something for just long enough to demonstrate they can do it, then move onto the next thing without truly taking the time to understand or master what they've been doing at a deeper level. Look at someone like Gerald Donald as an example of a true master at their given form. Boris Bunnik (Conforce, Versalife, Hexagon, etc.) is another one IMO; dude's been making Detroit-tinged techno and electro for ~15 years, and while none of it is necessarily "innovative" it's all really good. I'd rather listen to artists like these, who have taken the time to truly master their craft, than whatever modular-du-jour or trance revival crap the kids are churning out right now.

Long story short: focus on doing something well rather than doing something unique. Even when you try and copy or imitate, you will inevitably place your own stamp on it.

[subvers^v]

Sometimes I feel electronic nusic has left techno behind, brought forward by the likes of Autechre, Richard Devine, etc. And similar electronic artists who do their own thing and go past (surpass?) the shackles of "typical" techno.
I still love techno though, the energy and optimism, (dare I say hope) not that I listen to the newer stuff much any more ..

[subvers^v]

And it's still an art form in itself that I may never quite get...

[Lost to the Void]

Long story short: focus on doing something well rather than doing something unique. Even when you try and copy or imitate, you will inevitably place your own stamp on it.

That`s pretty much the opposite of what I stand for.
I`d rather hear some fresh but badly produced music, than a polished perfect regurgitation of a used up idea.
Focus on finding yourself in your music, the skills will follow.

[td3l]

Long story short: focus on doing something well rather than doing something unique. Even when you try and copy or imitate, you will inevitably place your own stamp on it.

That`s pretty much the opposite of what I stand for.
I`d rather hear some fresh but badly produced music, than a polished perfect regurgitation of a used up idea.
Focus on finding yourself in your music, the skills will follow.

I don't necessarily mean production quality. I'm talking about interesting and competent compositions within a chosen style. I'd generally rather listen to something like an AFX analord acid ripoff which actually bumps and has good riffs vs. a lifeless modular techno track which sonically advanced but otherwise devoid of substance.

Those aren't the only opinions, obviously. Given a choice I'll take the fresh but badly produced tunes too. My point is simply that novelty seems to be valued over quality in contemporary techno, and as producers we should focus firstly on making something which is *good* and not get too hung up on whether it's sufficiently "original."

[buffered]

new for the sake of new is shit. It is amateur
new as a byproduct of strong voice and conviction of the artist can be good. Over time this can develop into a solid original body of work.
This sort of discussion comes up alot in the design world where 'originality' 'freshness' 'the next' 'new' bla bla is a constant thing.
What you find is that the true greats and masters have a solid knowledge of the fundamentals of design. Worked within the field for a time and at some point took the knowledge and subverted/exploited it to create truely forward thinking work. Taking what works, seeing what lacks and adding years of honed taste to an output that is of quality. Fresh, new, but quality.
On the other side you have all these young ignorant kids that just want to make 'crazy' 'fresh' 'new' and honestly, it is just all wasteful garbage. The truely great recognise and are able to achieve a standard. From this they have a foundation to truely innovate. Anything else is either shortly sustained whimsical luck or a flash in the pan ignorance.
Of course there are always exceptions and we see these to be visionaries in time. I think there needs to be a balance. A good knowledge of basics to sit your innovation on is important.
Someone raised them before but a simple naive example that everyone could maybe relate to is Autechre around Confield era. It was new and fresh (ok you had Farmers Manual and all those guys but anyway)
Prior to this they had released pretty well made standard/experimental tracks. From that base they just said ok, what if we really fuck with this. The result was basically a honed knowledge being fucked with. It was innovative and original. Anyway. Whatever.

[td3l]

new for the sake of new is shit. It is amateur
new as a byproduct of strong voice and conviction of the artist can be good. Over time this can develop into a solid original body of work.
This sort of discussion comes up alot in the design world where 'originality' 'freshness' 'the next' 'new' bla bla is a constant thing.
What you find is that the true greats and masters have a solid knowledge of the fundamentals of design. Worked within the field for a time and at some point took the knowledge and subverted/exploited it to create truely forward thinking work. Taking what works, seeing what lacks and adding years of honed taste to an output that is of quality.

Precisely this.

[Amøbe]

Mervv pretty much wrote, what I initially was going at. When I try to do something from a completely new direction, 9/10 times it turns out to just be wack. However, when I try to mimick someone, I find myself a lot more comfortable in taking chances that actually creates a true difference and something new (rather than just something that is dissimilar).

I liked what Buffered wrote, I also often think about a speech Lars von Trier gave a few years ago (and I think I have quoted it on here before... nevermind), where he got an award for his oeuvre (in Danish I think it was life's work, but I'm not sure if that translates directly). He said that it was the one award he actually cared for, because he has this idea that artists are like scouts on an abandoned island. You can try and go in different direction. This will allow you to circle around your camp space and get an idea of what lies behind. The downside is that you can't get very far out. Trier has decided to only stay on one direction. He might come by some bad spaces, but he's interested in what comes next, if he keeps pushing for this direction.

I like this image, and I try to do somewhat the same.

[Lost to the Void]

Long story short: focus on doing something well rather than doing something unique. Even when you try and copy or imitate, you will inevitably place your own stamp on it.

That`s pretty much the opposite of what I stand for.
I`d rather hear some fresh but badly produced music, than a polished perfect regurgitation of a used up idea.
Focus on finding yourself in your music, the skills will follow.

I don't necessarily mean production quality. I'm talking about interesting and competent compositions within a chosen style. I'd generally rather listen to something like an AFX analord acid ripoff which actually bumps and has good riffs vs. a lifeless modular techno track which sonically advanced but otherwise devoid of substance.

Those aren't the only opinions, obviously. Given a choice I'll take the fresh but badly produced tunes too. My point is simply that novelty seems to be valued over quality in contemporary techno, and as producers we should focus firstly on making something which is *good* and not get too hung up on whether it's sufficiently "original."

Oh yeah, novelty is a problem for sure.
The instagram curse that made everyone think they can design their own instruments in eurorack.
I see it less of a problem than people missing the point of techno entirely, and just getting stuck in tropes. Hence the glut of RD909 old school shite techno videos spreading like a plague on the gram now.
It`s not even hard to avoid the obvious ones. No one needs another record with a fucking pitch rise on a 909 ride cymbal for example.
There`s too many people making techno based on what they think techno is perceived as, rather than making the music that comes from themselves within a techno framework. It`s lazy, and it`s why we see these cycles of historic regurgitation. People plundering the past for ideas because they lack the courage to dive into the unknown.

[Amøbe]

There`s too many people making techno based on what they think techno is perceived as, rather than making the music that comes from themselves within a techno framework. It`s lazy, and it`s why we see these cycles of historic regurgitation. People plundering the past for ideas because they lack the courage to dive into the unknown.

This sometimes frustrates me to bits! Of course it is a good idea to know the history, and how and what was done - mainly to learn the framework. But that framework should work as a playing field for experiments! There is so much fun and exciting things you can do, so I get almost irritated, when people are just trying to preserve the 90s style.

Recently I was at a talk Surgeon held, and he said something I found quite exciting, when people asked if he also did ambient sets to be able to experiment more. (from memory) his answer were along the lines that, he didn't think one of them allowed for more experimentation than the other - in fact that was one of the things that excites him about techno these days is that he can allow himself to do a lot of experimentation, and people will still accept it on the dance floor. The ambient stuff had more to do with him liking to make that kind of music from time to time

[speen]

I'm not sure why you guys are so much looking for new and innovative for the sake of it
you can also do something that has been done before and do it good or even better than others but maybe it's different for me, i just make shit that i like and i like old school stuff.

i also make hiphop beats sometimes, just for fun and i don't give a shit if it's a sample that has been used before as long as i don't flip it the same way or if the boom bap beats have been programmed a million times before. if it's dope it's dope.

as long as you don't actually rip shit off it's all good to me.

[mindstuff]

Every one of us is original so there is no trying to be 'original'...you just are.

[Lost to the Void]

I'm not sure why you guys are so much looking for new and innovative for the sake of it
you can also do something that has been done before and do it good or even better than others but maybe it's different for me, i just make shit that i like and i like old school stuff.

i also make hiphop beats sometimes, just for fun and i don't give a shit if it's a sample that has been used before as long as i don't flip it the same way or if the boom bap beats have been programmed a million times before. if it's dope it's dope.

as long as you don't actually rip shit off it's all good to me.

It`s not about looking for innovation just for the sake of it.
It`s about the fact that techno is old, and why bother sounding like Mills (or whatever/whoever) when Mills already does it.
No one is asking for the wheel to be reinvented, but creative originality and personality, feeling the artist present within the work, and not just a copy of tropes, which is not the sound of the artist, it`s the artist adopting anothers sound.

It's creatively pointless painting the same way as picasso, or Bacon (artists that do that, whilst it still requires talent, are just known as reproducers), it`s pointless making a film the same as Hal Hartley, or Sam Raimi for the same reason. Same for comic books, or literature or any creative medium. For some reason in techno literally just sounding the same as a major artist is fine?

At subsekt I would hope people try to find their own voice and flavour in the music, rather than aspire to just churn out the tropes.

It`s literally what creativity is about.