« on: May 12, 2015, 08:26:48 PM »
Well you know, there are a lot more people creating finished music now than back in the previous century. Creating and recording good quality audio is itself a lot easier now that we have computer DAWs. And a lot of artists do get better not only at playing their preferred instrument(s) but also at editing and recording their own compositions, and mastering the final album, the end product. So the need for expensive studio time has certainly been drastically reduced. But it is not that the need has completely gone away, that would be presumptuous. It would presume that everyone gets everything right on their own albums. It would presume that a second pair of ears is not needed. It would presume that their album could not be improved in its audio quality or balance or overall arrangement. I think they generally can be ... in the hands of a skilled engineer. Of course, in the hands of a not so good engineer you may be wasting time and money, that goes without saying. But so often I hear albums that could have benefited from having better editing and mastering. That aside, I do share your view that ambient is a peculiar beast, and can be quite different from recording real world instruments where veracity of sound is the big thing, and different from the pop world where pumping things up and adding a new twist to standard 4 piece bands and vocals is important. There is no way ambient should be. A particular way it should sound. It can be glitchy and lofi, for example. But no matter what it's style, there is still a musicality that should be achieved and it should be polished to the best it can be. Time and nurture should be given to it.
I have little interest when someone announces: I'm going to do an album a week for the next couple of months ! Am I not amazing !
No, you are not. It's probably gonna be crap.