|
>I'm suggesting that this might be true of making music also. No, it isn't, because unlike with getting from point A to point B, the end result isn't always the same with music making. Music, in that aspect, is more like writing code or visual arts. Printing and photography becoming widely available didn't make visual arts worse, they did the opposite, because instead of focusing on just technical proficiency, the art was forced to move in a more creative direction. With programming, us not punching cards with code and not using assembly as the primary language didn't make things worse, it just allowed us to go on a higher level and create things that would be unthinkable without that. Same with music making. Being able to record a virtual orchestra in your bedroom studio doesn't make music as art worse, it opens up way more room for things that weren't even possible before. Just by definition, when it becomes much easier and really accessible to record something in your bedroom, which previously only a few extremely rich people in the world with tons of experienced staff could do, it allows for art to evolve faster and move forward just by the sheer drive of all the people who now have access to contribute to it. |
However, the path that Reich did actually follow underscores the senses in which making music is so often a social activity, and there is no doubt based on interviews with Reich that having/choosing to work with other human musicians changed the evolution of his music. Not everyone likes his music, and of those who do, some might have preferred the direction it might have gone had Reich been an Ableton Live user. Nevertheless, I continue to believe that music as a social activity is critical to almost all good-to-great music, and that contemporary technology frequently undermines that.
[0] perhaps paradoxically, I am the author of just such a piece of technology.