Taking sides: Brian Eno on computer-based music

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

I've just spent a few hours poring over the Eno interviews at www.geocities.com/Area51/Vault/1381/eno_interviews.html and was wondering what other people make of his claim that computer-based music is over-fussy and unfunky.

― Chris, Sunday, 17 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I suppose I should own up to disagreeing with him. It's odd that he should dismiss sequenced music for being "completely locked down" whilst also professing a love of house and techno.

― Chris, Sunday, 17 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Chris do you think you could point to the specific interview(s) you're talking about? This is a really intersting topic but that page is hard to navigate. I think I've read the interview you're thinking of, but I'd like to look at it again before I comment. Thanks.

― Mark, Sunday, 17 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

The interview Eno gave the Wire in October 2001 is a good starting point:

"...'Looking back in 20 years it will be very obvious that computer music had a particular flavour, just like the music of the 60’s with the wah-wah pedal', he continued. It will have the sound of its technology 'unfunky, overfussy and as dead as stone'".

Later on in the interview he adds:

"I don't think [computer-reliant producers] are aware of what particularly stilted music they make. You can't do anything interesting with cutting-edge technology except not make it cutting- edge."

― Chris, Sunday, 17 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Eno is talking about the unimaginitive use of sequencing and sampling, but the computer is a tool like any other. It can be used well. You can make very physical, out-of-time and intuitive-sounding music with a computer. Eno himself uses Koan software to introduce chance elements into his compositions. One day, as he says, computers will 'have enough Africa in them'. I totally agree with his impatience with computers in the studio, though, and I totally agree that tight efficient MIDI loops are going to sound (already sound) horribly dead and boring.

I was at a Vinicius Caturla show last night and couldn't keep my ears off the drummer, whose bossa patterns I was trying to memorise for future programming. In the end I had to admit it would take me about a week to program something that loose and odd. The drummer himself could just pick up a tambourine and do it instantly. He could also 'listen' to the other musicians, read their facial expressions, pick up on their emotions, and many other things no computer will ever do.

― Momus, Sunday, 17 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

As a fan of electrinic music I could see his point. Compare two bands New Order and Depeche Mode, the former has a lot more songs that have held up than the latter. NO 's music held up because the band used organic instruments along with key boards. Most of early Depeche Mode (1980-84) have not held up because of over relying on synthesizers for making music. Face it a lot electronic music from the late 70's and 80's is rather dated.

― Micheline, Sunday, 17 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

...Then again, if you asked human musicians to play the whooshy sound-swoops of Stockhausen or the ridiculous rhythm patterns of Aphex Twin, they would be lost.

― Momus, Sunday, 17 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I was just thinking about this the other day. A musician of my generation is probably reacting against the tyranny of MIDI. I personally am trying to get as much sloppy and irrational and physical-sounding stuff into my music (albeit by electronic means). But younger bands coming up now, at least the ones in NYC, are keen to get that shiny early 80s synth sound, all Fairlights and Linn drums, Alex Sadkin, sequencing, Planet Rock, all that stuff from the days when a sampler cost as much as a Rolls Royce. And I can see that, but I'm not ready to go back to the 80s. I'm still reacting against the idiocies of techno and house (the 'hallelujah break', the compressed 909 kick etc).

― Momus, Sunday, 17 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Trouble is, Eno's been saying this for SO LONG (i interviewed him in 89-ish and he said it to me then): i think it's a cute theory, not an empirical judgment, not a judgment from listening. I like his idea — as an idea — that the physical movement of the mouse etc has intrinsic physical manifestations in the outcome, and as mouse-movement (and computer environments generally) are seemingly "non-sexy", then the music is too. I like it but I completely don't buy it: it's as bogus as the distinction between "organic" and "non-organic" instruments (or acoustic and electric, come to that). Difft ppl are turned on in difft environments, big whoop; some ppl get off on leather, some on plastic. Some ppl even like FLUTES for god's sake.

― mark s, Sunday, 17 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I'm still reacting against the idiocies of techno and house (the 'hallelujah break', the compressed 909 kick etc).

oy vey.

― jess, Sunday, 17 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Some ppl even like FLUTES for god's sake.

Bingo. Who needs Prince and Marvin Gaye when there's Ian Anderson and Zamfir?

(This is actually something my old aunt wld say. It's true.)

― Andy K, Sunday, 17 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Eno is right though that it is very difficult to escape the sonic and conceptual confines of the times you live in. The technology appears to offer freedom but actually leads you down certain paths. It's circular - the manufacturers offer the features they think will do best in the market. And most people want what's already out there, but perhaps a slightly better version. They don't have the imagination to envisage anything radically different. I find this limitation to be one of the frustrating things about being human.

― David Inglesfield, Sunday, 17 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I've been thinking about this lately, and I feel it is just the difference between music from/for the heart and music from/for the mind. It's very difficult to make computer-music with heart and soul, and likewise it's very difficult to make "intelligent" music without a computer. Both types of music are great, but for different reasons.

― A Nairn, Sunday, 17 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

The Eno remark that I was thinking of was the comment that many laptop producers become ensnared in the microscopic possibilities of DSP processing and something lose site of the macro, their work as a whole. I think of that quote when I sit down to listen some something on Schematic, or some of the Tigerbeat6 stuff like Electric Company. In my opinion, a lot of the artists on Schematic (not all) seem too wrapped up in what the computer and do, and don't spend enough time thinking about making a good piece of music. But that's more just a new way for music to go wrong, and not a general trend.

There's also an Eno interview somewhere where he talks about beat- driven electronic music being too tied to "the grid." I've been struggling for a long time to figure out why I like some electronic music w/ extreme repetition in part because of the repetition, while other loop-driven stuff drives me crazy. Eno seemed to be on to something w/ this, but I can't put my finger on what.

― Mark, Sunday, 17 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

It's very difficult to make computer- music with heart and soul

if this 'heart and soul' concept of yours means emotional response, please explain synth pads then.

― ethan, Sunday, 17 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I think one of the real problems with computer music is that it makes it very easy to get passable results. It all boils down to writing, and if the tune is decent it will work regardless of the engineering context. A lot of the laptop brigade are just making weird noises and sequencing the hell out of them. I think much of the computer music of today could benefit from a bit of the old "theme and variation"

― mt, Monday, 18 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I was listening to Scratch Pet Land this morning, and that's an interesting record because it's difficult to tell how it was made. I hear those sounds & wonder, "What's that? Computer? Toy instrument? Sample?" Might not be a bad thing to strive for sometimes, to make computer-based music where the computer becomes invisible.

YAAAAAY! Mark just put in a nutshell my whole rationale of the last year or three. Creativity is not device-dependent. It's good (as I believe Tom Waits once said) to change instruments every so often just to trip up one's lazy habits. If you use a computer, try using it in an amateurish folk art way, make weaving or basketwork with it. Use old, low-res software, low sampling rates, unrecommended methods. As Eno says, get away from that damned cutting edge. And as Eno also says, throw away the manual. And, quoth Eno and Scratch Pet Land, 'put more Africa in the computer'.

― Momus, Monday, 18 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Sorry, but this is way too pat. Honestly, the reason NO's songs sound better than DM now is because they wrote better songs, not because they mixed organic and non-organic or anything else.

I'm still reacting against the idiocies of techno and house (the 'hallelujah break', the compressed 909 kick etc)

aside from agreeing with Jess in the "oy vey" dept., do you mean the "Amen break"? the reason it's called the "Amen" is that it's taken from the drum break of an old gospel instrumental called "Amen Brother" by the Winstons, not because of any church connotations. just wanted to clear that up

― M. Matos, Monday, 18 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I'd got further than M.M. above and say that DM's early records sound fantastic except for the human-organic components in them - Dave Gahan's overdetermined, straining, voice and Gore's 'dark' lyrics. The point about computers isn't that they have no soul, it's that they can have no concept of soul - an advantage when that concept becomes as limiting as it often does in rock and pop music.

― Tom, Monday, 18 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Thanks for all the interesting feedback everyone.

I wonder if Hip-Hop has enough "Africa" in it for Mr Eno?

Having recently "gone" electronic myself I'm still excited by the possibilities rather than oppressed by them - sequencing and sampling is definitely more productive than 4-track recording for a bedroom musician such as myself.

For someone who's often presented as the prophet of electronica Eno seems to have some pretty reactionary views. For example, he has also claimed that studio-as-instrument approach has become too commonplace and that he wants to get back to the good ol' days of rehearsing songs before toying around in the studio. I suppose he'll be dissing anyone using synths as "prog" before too long...

Having said all that, he's still God.

― Chris, Monday, 18 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

having africa ? ability of parts to not stay locked on a rhythm but drift in and out and come together now and again - tight BUT loose with SWING - hard to do well and ONE MILLION MILES AWAY from looping a break and not manipulating it - funky drummer once looped became UNFUNKY ?

― a-33, Monday, 18 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Andy K.: Bingo. Who needs Prince and Marvin Gaye when there's Ian Anderson and Zamfir?
(This is actually something my old aunt wld say. It's true.)

You know Andy, you really should make up your own mind on what is true and not, instead of believing everything your aunt says.
;-)

― OleM, Monday, 18 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Matos, I agree with you when say that early NO wrote better songs, butlets remember that back in 1984 People are People and Master and Servant were big hits which are now dated, even DM fans ( including myself) cringe at the mere sound of these songs. I think that Enjoy the Silence or Clean are infinitely better than the early stuff (1980- 84) because the live instruments add more power and depth to the music. Momus- You're completely right that some sounds are impossible to create with organic instruments. Eletronic music can expand music into new sounds and patterns.

― Micheline, Monday, 18 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

For someone who's often presented as the prophet of electronica Eno seems to have some pretty reactionary views.

It's true Eno sometimes seems reactionary, but I think that's just a mark of his interest in following an idea wherever it may lead. Left and right cannot hold him!

I went to his lecture a few years ago at Sadler's Wells, and he was saying that the most important thing for the future of humanity was the GATT trade talks. Exactly the thing kids were smashing Seattle to stop. He also once said, when asked what CDs he was listening to, that he couldn't bear any music made for CD and sold for money, and was listening exclusively to Russian church music, in churches!

― Momus, Monday, 18 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I agree with you when say that early NO wrote better songs, butlets remember that back in 1984 People are People and Master and Servant were big hits which are now dated, even DM fans (including myself) cringe at the mere sound of these songs. I think that Enjoy the Silence or Clean are infinitely better than the early stuff (1980- 84) because the live instruments add more power and depth to the music

Fair enough, but I think that NO wrote better songs overall--"People" and "Master" if played by a full-on, live rock band wouldn't hold up as well because (IMHO, obviously) they're not very good, period. I mean, Shannon's early singles and "I Wonder if I Take You Home" and "The Dominatrix Sleeps Tonight" are some of my favorite records ever, and no one could say they're anything but synthetic. And I think "Enjoy the Silence" sounds, if anything, just as dated as "People" or "Master" but ends up sounding better just because it's a better song.

I'd also note that, given the amount of processing that records had on them in the '80s, most of the live instruments on anyone's record were made to sound syntheic during that period. Unless I knew there was a "real guitar" on "Enjoy" from reading articles about DM at the time, I'd have just figured it for another synth. Same with NO a lot of the time

― M. Matos, Monday, 18 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Eno's been plying this spiel for years. I remember when he released Nerve Net, he made a big to-do about it being non-gridlocked, ur- "Africa" (which sure sounds like inverse colonial condescension to me: quintessential moneyed limey white guy schmuck begging to tell the world jus' how funky his lillywhite ass really is; he alone UNDERSTANDS the funky imperatives of the cradle of black civilization) electronics-done-right floogeldy-floo.

Funny, it just sounded tight-assed and dull (like everything else the bald git has ever done).

― J Sutcliffe, Monday, 18 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Funny, it just sounded tight-assed and dull (like everything else the bald git has ever done).

Sure, if you don't count 'Roxy Music,' 'For Your Pleasure,' 'Another Green World,' 'Here Come the Warm Jets,' 'Evening Star,' 'On Land,' 'Before and After Science,' 'Remain in Light,' 'Low,' 'Heroes'... need I continue?!

― Clarke B., Tuesday, 19 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I'm listening to him right now, a voice among dozens in the Scratch Orchestra's reading of Cornelius Cardew's 'The Great Learning'. This man has a finger in so many pies.

I think Eno is responsible for some of the worst and the best records ever made. His interest in aleatory procedures like Oblique Strategies, his determination to remove his own will from the activity of composition, his interest in studio process for its own sake rather than for its results, his extremely low boredom threshold, all mean that the records often fail. This, after all, is what 'experimental' means: giving yourself license to fail.

Eno being funky is, for me, Eno at his worst. Eno making messy rock ('The Third Uncle') is much better, and Eno the perfumier of ambivalent emotions ('On Land') is very good too. Eno as diarist: brilliant. Eno as 'enlivener of the musical imagination': unmatched. Eno as 'the Scaramouche of the synthesiser' ('Virginia Plain'): analogue heaven. Eno in interview: a master. Put him in command at the Ministry of the Future! Maoism, dandy sex, berets, minimalism, feathers, strategy, art, 'treatments', hurrah!

Throw away the manual, but keep the Great Synthesiser!

― Momus, Tuesday, 19 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

ten months pass...

Quote: "I was listening to Scratch Pet Land this morning, and that's an interesting record because it's difficult to tell how it was made. I hear those sounds & wonder, "What's that? Computer? Toy instrument? Sample?" Might not be a bad thing to strive for sometimes, to make computer-based music where the computer becomes invisible."

It's funny, while I've never heard "Scratch Pet Land", I've found that in the last few years, I've lost much of my ability to imagine or care how a lot of experimental (or just scene-ish) electronic music is made. I really value being able to imagine how a recording got to sound the way it does (a situation between people, or between a person and their environment, etc. - I know I'm not being so clear, but I like to imagine how recordings are made. I remember hearing a cassette of someone playing the piano when I was in University, and I heard the sound of the bench squeaking, and was so happy - I really liked being able to hear that, because it reminded me of an aspect of playing the piano that I almost never hear acknowledged in music-recordings - that's a small example of what I mean). I don't know whether I just feel more jaded about experimental-electronic music now (and I know I am), but most of the time I just imagine that the sounds I hear could come from anywhere and are just processed beyond recognition by a young white man sitting at a laptop for several hours, and the most appropriate real-world reference would be the project or band-name used by another young white man* who sat at his laptop for hours and processed and layered sounds from wherever until they sounded similar. I know it's not really very understanding of me, but all the stories that have come to mind over the last few years of hearing such things involve similar situations and reference-points. I'm happy when I can hear something that sounds like something, somewhere, has changed or could change - I don't know so much about how to explain that. Do people get really excited about doing this? Is it just cool and nobody is REALLY excited? Am I just wrong?

Oh - I like that 'experimental' would mean a license to fail.

*or a different one, or the same one with a different project-name this time

― Tom (the other one), Friday, 20 December 2002 19:56 (twenty-three years ago)

I said some very, very similar things to Eno before I started to understand how to use software/hardware in more "organic" ways.

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Friday, 20 December 2002 21:27 (twenty-three years ago)

five years pass...

Bloom, iPhone ambient app by Brian Eno

― Milton Parker, Wednesday, 8 October 2008 20:12 (seventeen years ago)

what does the location api do in that

― Kramkoob (Catsupppppppppppppp dude 茄蕃), Wednesday, 8 October 2008 20:29 (seventeen years ago)

Listen to a generative composition or create your own.
Play notes by tapping on the screen.
(Listen) (Create)

― Milton Parker, Wednesday, 8 October 2008 21:47 (seventeen years ago)

...and suddenly, everyone's a non-musician.

― Naive Teen Idol, Thursday, 9 October 2008 01:11 (seventeen years ago)

this thing's pretty great. it's basically an adjustable Discreet Music app albeit with tinny Neroli sounds. you can set the loop time from 5 to 90+ seconds, choose from a number of scales (including 'Neroli'). You can set it to gradually randomize, or to gradually segue back into earlier melodies -- it can be amazing when it momentarily returns to something you had running three hours ago, the sense of longterm structure is remarkable.

this should get its own thread actually. I've had some generative things running on desktop machines while working before, but it's a whole new experience to have this in a pocket device -- I love the way the iPhone's built-in speaker sounds, it already turns everything into tinny, wispy, floating ambient sound. I had a near dreamtime experience leaving Zep's 'Kashmir' going in a hotel's bathroom, it sounded unreal...

― Milton Parker, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:14 (seventeen years ago)

and this

first contact with RJDJ

― Milton Parker, Thursday, 9 October 2008 19:47 (seventeen years ago)

Electroplankton on the ds 2 years ago

― zappi, Thursday, 9 October 2008 22:59 (seventeen years ago)

hmmm, "embedding disabled by request", huh?

― zappi, Thursday, 9 October 2008 23:00 (seventeen years ago)

Yeah, I am enjoying playing around with this. More simple little sound-making toys, please.

― Mark, Friday, 10 October 2008 03:54 (seventeen years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.