What would music be like if we had less to work with?

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

I was originally gonna post this in the Spam Thread, but I figured it'd make a pretty interesting topic instead.

I'm sorta wondering what the implications would be if the technology we had to do music with was as limited as what it was in the early 90's. I mean, we have near unlimited resources for music nowadays, so what if we only had so much and just had to get really freakin' good with that?

What do you think electronic music would be like?

[simonli2575]

RAVE AND JUNGLE ALL THE WAY.

[DJ Skrudge]

Very few bedroom producers -> much less bad dubstep on YouTube and Soundcloud

Also this site probably wouldn't exist, as the pony music community wouldn't exist to the same extent as it is now

No Skrillex (at least not in the same way, assuming everything is now hardware and analog)

Electronic music would remain primarily underground (good or bad, who knows)

Lots of techno/hardcore/DnB as simonli suggested

Artists like Deadmau5 and Daft Punk would either be even more popular than at present (because they'd be a rarity) or shunned (because popular opinion might still overlook electronic music at this stage)

Disclaimer: I'm probably wrong on some or most of these counts

[Fimbulin]

Orchestral music would sound heaps better, as mostly trained musicians would be attempting it, but Kontakt would not exist as it does today so producing electronically would end up with rooms full of tape decks and samplers. Still not a huge deal as mostly trained musicians would even want to operate such technology.

[Freewave]

Musicians generally had to buy expensive physical equiptment to make the music (phys synths and recording gear) and to capture it. Then most had to deal with a label to get it out there or even a pressing plant if it was white label and the closest to homemade (as a dj could do it) A lot of stuff was through samplers (ie the amen break) so breakbeat sampling was essential. Lets remember (or learn) that vinyl WAS the way edm was bought in in the 90's and was mixed by dj's, it only went more onto cd's in the later 90's and then to mp3 and online at 2000 era. Although a lot of hot tracks in the late 90's were still only on vinyl (and the top dj's were the only ones who had copies) and the only cd rips were off exclusive dj mixes (mixed together) and were played more at shows then published) or were $10 cd single imports. So much great stuff too was only through the uk market. America was really not into edm until only the late 90's (big beat opened it up) and that actually crashed and went back underground in 2001 as it got too commercial.

Once music went digital and broadband became a thriving entity everything changed at once. You could make it with just pc's, you could get it via broadband and in mp3, you could get things for free, you could make it in your home, you could bring your crate of records to a club on a jumpdrive). It literally changed everything and quickly.

Believe me there's good and bad things with these changes but most of them are good things for those who love to hear and make music. Wealth should not decide what you can hear and what you can make.

[simonli2575]

Musicians generally had to buy expensive physical equiptment to make the music (phys synths and recording gear) and to capture it.

Wow, never heard of synths that require physical equipments to make.

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

lots of things

we..kind of all know that...the question was what music would be like or how you think it'd be different, not how it was made.

[itroitnyah]

Everything would have the "hardware" sound to it, because then people would need to buy the hardware synthesizers and stuff. No electronic music genre would go away, it'd just sound different, and there'd be a lot less of it around.

[Nine Volt]

It would suck.

[Navron]

lots of things

we..kind of all know that...the question was what music would be like or how you think it'd be different, not how it was made.

So you're asking what electronic music would be like if we were limited by 90s technology?

I'm going to hazard a guess, and say it would probably sound like the 90s.

I sort of get where you're going with the question, but you're excluding a big factor and including a different one, which sort of cancel each other out.

IF music technology magically reverted back to 90s technology, I personally don't think much would change. Most synths nowadays that create really wacky sounds are based on actual hardware principles, so any modern influences in music could still be made based off people designing and tweaking older technology to create modern styles. Not to mention if it was JUST music technology, most people could still get into it with learning tools such as the internet.

Now, if all technology reverted back to the 90s, you'd have quite a few disgruntled bedroom musicians, because they would lack any easy method of learning to utilize hardware, and it would fall back to the case where you'd have to personally know somebody knowledgeable to apprentice under. As for the music styles though, I still don't think much would change, since many artists do have a background in hardware, and they will find a way to continue writing the music/genres they like to make.

If all technology AND people's memories of new music genres all reverted back to the 90s, then you would just simply reexperience the 90s. No change.

Your question is kind of flawed from the get go, because if any modern influence exists, the genres and sound design wouldn't change much, and if all influence is set back, it would just be the same as it was to where it was set back to.

[Freewave]

lots of things

we..kind of all know that...the question was what music would be like or how you think it'd be different, not how it was made.

So you're asking what electronic music would be like if we were limited by 90s technology?

I'm going to hazard a guess, and say it would probably sound like the 90s.

I sort of get where you're going with the question, but you're excluding a big factor and including a different one, which sort of cancel each other out.

IF music technology magically reverted back to 90s technology, I personally don't think much would change. Most synths nowadays that create really wacky sounds are based on actual hardware principles, so any modern influences in music could still be made based off people designing and tweaking older technology to create modern styles. Not to mention if it was JUST music technology, most people could still get into it with learning tools such as the internet.

Thanks for trying to back up my point. That if technology stayed the same as it was in the 90's we would be stuck in all the technological entrapments. Expensive hardware synths, vinyl, big beat, no soulseek, and no flashy electrohouse or dubstep. It's silly to talk about what if's if they couldn't happen. Technology IMPROVES and quickly, that's what it does or else it would just sound the same as it was in the time it stopped devloping.

Do keep in mind thought that people often seek retro technology (ie why fatboy slim bought and made music about the 303 which was NOT new technology) and that's why so many software synths emulate vintage synths too or analog effects. But that's always just a small niche. Only reason it wouldn't evolve is if society collapsed for some reason (zombie apocalypse is right on eery). And no i don't think many 14 year olds have thought at all what listening to, buying, or making edm in the 90's was like.

[Conchetupony]

Guys, trackers have existed, and music has been made in computers, with them, since the eighties. They were popular among the demoscene (guys that pushed computers to their limits with pretty graphics), and they probably were pretty easy to pirate. Same thing as with DAWs and bedroom producers today. Here is a relatively mainstream track, released in 1992.

[topitmunkeydog]

Forget music production. I think a bigger matter is; there would be just a lot less music. It's so easy to like start a band or whatever today but in the 80s and 90s if someone even got enough equipment they'd still be stuck in their garages trying to become nirvana or something

[Freewave]

Forget music production. I think a bigger matter is; there would be just a lot less music. It's so easy to like start a band or whatever today but in the 80s and 90s if someone even got enough equipment they'd still be stuck in their garages trying to become nirvana or something

And they would likely have to do it semi-professionally. The idea of a single bedroom musician (not even a band) who makes all his music, does the mixing and mastering, and is getting it out independently (w/o a label and perhaps for free) is very much a recent phenomenon. Sure there were people in the indie scene or with white labels who did it on a very strapped budget (as well as Jandek and the Outsider music wing) but most of these guys still needed to get a physical product out and through a small music label. Digital distribution and creation en masse is tied into technology and is therefore only recently become a reality.

[JSynth]

It would suck.

this.

[caprixsnare]

bad side:no dubstep on figureheads edm will evolve slowly without our skrillexes to bring in more diverse crowds. digital music wont be competitive anymore because people will have to pay allot of money.

good side: Without massive competition we will have more electronic music on the radio than usual because people will only have like 1,000 electronic musicians to listen too (hopefully the word plur will still be sacred).

Over all I will say it sucks hard

[simonli2575]

sort-of-a bad side:edm will evolve slowly

good side: no dubstep on figureheads. without our skrillexes to bring in more diverse crowds. digital music wont be competitive anymore because people will have to pay allot of money. Without massive competition we will have more electronic music on the radio than usual because people will only have like 1,000 electronic musicians to listen too (hopefully the word plur will still be sacred).

FTFY.