« on: October 07, 2009, 08:20:33 AM »
Packaging / artwork is one thing, but the music is the work. I would imagine in most cases, the
packaging /artwork is an afterthought. Looked at once the music has been finished, Sure, its
important (as are the album name and track titles) and part of the whole 'package', but its not the
primary artistic statement.
Anyone can release as much material as they want to these days.
In an increasingly 'instant' culture, I'd be curious to know how much time was spent on an album and
how much time an artist thinks might be needed to create the album. Forrest's comment on him taking
a year on a single track, shows a serious commitment to the work. I would say this level of
committing such a large amount of time is rare these days. I'm not saying spending 10 years on an
album is a good thing, but recording a 'jam' and releasing it as an album swings to the other side
My feeling is that over time, listeners will tire of all the huge amount of stuff out there. After
all, there's only so many hours in the day to listen to music. Equally some artists will tire of
releasing their work.
While it fair to say theres a lot of samey-ness/recycling in ambient, it doesn't apply to every
artist. Maybe one can tire of ambient ?. Certainly I'd like to hear a wider variety of interesting
sound(s) in the genre.
What do listeners want from the 'scene' ? I really don't know. For me, I think the bottom line is
Quality - quality work that can be listened to repeatedly and reveal new elements over time.
On the subject of fidelity, the content is king. A fantastic production is highly desirable, but not
at the expense of the content.