"The producers didn't understand the capabilities of the instrument—and they still don't. It takes imagination to think of a sound no one has ever heard before." -Walter Sear
Again, found on Synthtopia:
These five pieces are derivative. I don't think this point is arguable. This is what happens when genres get overly specific. Any variation outside of the formula ejects the piece from classification.
To the people that say "I hate trance. It all sucks.", I say, sticking to ANY formula sucks. The more narrowly-defined a genre is, the less room for differentiation exists. If I can't hear the artist behind the formula, what is the point? Money, I guess.
The winds of fashion will soon sweep all this forgettable music away. Musical genres are a form of fashion, but synthesis technology itself is subject to fashion.
This is where it started.
"Moog was himself a witness to the power of his bass sound when he was invited to bring his synthesizer to a New York studio session where Simon and Garfunkel were recording their album, Bookends (1968). Mood set up the bass sound himself for the track "Save the Life of a Child." which opens with the sound: "One sound I remember distinctly was a plucked string, like a bass sound. Then it would slide down– it was something you could not do on an acoustic bass or an electric bass… a couple of session musicians came through. One guy was playing a bass and he stops and he listens, and listens. He turned white as a sheet." - Analog Days, Trevor Pinch
So then, someone with a Moog could find a lot of studio work thereafter. But the subtractive synthesis sound becomes dated and people wanted something new. So, if you could program FM, and knew your way around a DX7, you could find some studio work. Then sampling became popular. If you had a Fairlight or an Emulator, you could find some studio work. This process repeats itself over and over to this day. In some cases, the genres are actually defined by the technology used.
When I say the promise of synthesis has largely been squandered, this is one example. Instead of exploring potential, we spend a majority of our efforts reproducing the success of others. This comes with a danger, though. Fashion inherently dates itself and the highs are transient.
If your music is dominated by technology or genre, be prepared for the inevitable crash.
Laver's Law
Anything past the Dowdy point, the creator becomes irrelevant and the work in question is simply an example, whereas innovators, people ahead of their time are remembered.
Indecent - 10 years before its time
Shameless - 5 years before its time
Daring - 1 year before its time
Smart - current
Dowdy - 1 year after its time
Hideous - 10 years after its time
Ridiculous - 20 years after its time
Amusing - 30 years after its time
Quaint - 50 years after its time
Charming - 70 years after its time
Romantic - 100 years after its time
Beautiful - 150 years after its time
