Donny, perhaps we're merely victims of modern society. It's just another symptom of the INSTANT gratification we've grown to expect, partly because of the fast paced society we're living in, which means less & less time available to devote to becoming better musicians. My former vocal coach (Judy Davis) always reminded her students that this instant gratification trend began way back with the onset of television, instant cereal, & the microwave generation were we came to EXPECT instant results with everything. With the computer internet age, everything has speed up that much faster.

The FACT is, that art & music are akin to making fine wine. Yes, you can produce cheap wine (albeit cheap tasting too ) quickly, but FINE wine takes years to age. The same goes for musicianship & other artistic creative endevours as well. Regretably, people today are finding less & less time (impatience) to put in the dues (hours & years) required to become good musicians, and instead, opting for the a 'quick buck' gig solution, relying on technology to cover up for their musicianship deficiencies. This in turn gives the public the impression that anybody can become a musician (aka star) now, and that hutsfa & bravado matter more than musicianship to become a pro. Thankfully there are audiences out there that still APPRECIATE musicianship & willing to pay to see music performed live (as well as the personal creative expression that go along with it). How long this lasts, I don't know, but I may have to go down with the sinking ship if it comes to that.

Scott

I agree with Scott's sentiment.

IMO, the recent trend will intensify over the next few years. I see nothing changing the current landscape whereas technology enables many under-talented users to appear impressively skilled.

My belief, is that those players who DO have actual skill and technique will outshine the others in some very limited environments. The two groups will seem as one to the masses.

I must recognise the natural change in popular music that we've seen in the last 20 years. Punk & New wave was the popular style back then...its life cycle took it into the late 80's early 90's when more earthy sounding bands like REM, Nirvana, etc. then took center stage. Could we suggest that there is a higher degree of musicianship to be found in REM than Flock of Seagulls? I'd like to think that at least, given my appreciation for REM.

The only thing constant in music is change. Gershwin was too modern for many, as was Elvis, Jerry Lee Lewis, the Beatles, the Who, Elvis Costello, Prince, REM, Nirvana, the Goo-Goo Dolls, etc...

As arranger players, we have the unique opportunity/challenge to be able to interpret a variety of music for OUR audiences. We play a different role than the "big names" do in music. I honestly think that a trained, skilled, creative arranger user will be able to play well above a level of a untrained user who has plenty of money to toss around.

...and if we don't...then shame on us "trained" performers. Perhaps the accessability of this technology may serve to keep the rest of us honest. Add songs to our play list that don't necessarily fit in easily-but rather, with our skills and an openess for new interpretations and creativity, we can add our own mark on unexpected songs.

Bill in Dayton

I really think that rap music and the society that fuels it has robbed us of a couple of generations of musicians - where are the modern young Stevie Wonders, Herbie Hancocks, and Duke Ellingtons? TV shows like MTV's "Cribs" don't help... it's a little sad for me to see some 20-something left-field rapper that practically noone has heard of chilling in his mansion and showing off his fleet of expensive cars. I'm sure this just shows young people how to get rich quick in music without going through the trouble to get a real musical education. Why work?

But nobody is fooling anyone - there are several waiters that work in the restaurants where I do that have made comments to me to the effect of "we're rappers - we're not real musicians like you..." and "we don't know how to play an instrument so we just use Acid and mix loops...". These guys know they are short-changing themselves by not learning how to play an instrument, but the instant gratification thing and the chance for instant money is too strong to resist.

We shouldn't be complaining actually... as trained career musos we offer a chance for our audiences to enjoy seeing music played. I can't tell you how often parents bring their children up to where I am to watch me play. And the more that this becomes a rarity, the greater the demand for our services. I kinda dread the day that some wunderkid shows up in my neighborhood that can outplay me - I'll be looking for a new neighborhood when that happens!

Funny, just this week I was in GC, and as I walked through the guitar section - I heard this amazing R&R riff coming from a Les Paul. I walked over closer to see who was playing and the kid couldn't have been 9 yrs old ! I swear it! The Les Paul weighed about as much as he did. He was just smiling' and jammin' away. It actually made the hair on my neck stand up to see such a talent in such a young body.
There's hope yet!

When I listen to some of the fusion groups, I feel there are some serious new players
who have transitioned from simple structure and technique to something of substance.

That's a beautiful thing!

Russ

THis is all fine and well.....but there no young people carrying the torch like we did to learn to play an instrument & the music fom the 30, 40's etc, .....sadly when we're gone it's pretty much gone......score one for karaoke artists and DJ's.. Phoooey .....;(

[This message has been edited by Dnj (edited 12-02-2004).]

Music lasts forever. Someone will want to play it and someone will want to create it and someone will want to listen to it. What do we know of music hundreds and thousands of years ago. We have the advantage of history and the ability to reproduce the sounds and instruments of the past, present and future.

Society is ever-changing. Just because what we see with our eyes seems a certain way, doesn't mean that is the reality of things. There are many musicians out there studying and playing even better than yesterday's best. There are a lot of lazy people out there too. There is new technology that suits the new society. Who are we to judge?

Hey, I've got an idea. Let's have a professional music league and pay the creators and players millions of dollars and put their faces on every conceiveable piece of food and apparel. Then maybe the arts would become important enough for our society to think its children should be schooled in it. And then maybe our schools, colleges and industries would value and support it.

Music lasts forever!

[This message has been edited by cassp (edited 12-02-2004).]

The problem as I see it is clutter. There aren't fewer good musicians today, there's just more bad ones. Technology has made it possible for anyone, and I mean anyone, to make a semblance of music and therefore a CD. I get so annoyed with people who want to trade CD's. After all, they have a CD too, so they are equals, Not So! 19 times out of 20 they get the better end of the deal.
In days gone by, only serious people could make an album; because they couldn't do it with their PC and put it up for free download on some crappy internet site.

Have any of you heard the NPR show called "From the Top"? Students 18 years old and under doing fantastic renditions of classical works. Yes, indeed, the musicians still exist; it's just the haystack is getting bigger and bigger and the needles harder to find.

I have a couple of thoughts on this thread that I thought I would share with you from my perspective.
I am 73 years old now so I started on my learning curve in 1937. I think I am very typical of that time.
I hated music. I hated piano lessons. I hated practicing several hours a day. I hated the piano teacher. I hated my parents for putting me through this agony.
Seven long years of classical music. WHY? Because my parents liked it. I never did learn to like it even thought I learned to play it well. I also had to play at the cutsey recitals about once a month for my mothers instant gratification. I also hated that.
Now, having said all that is it any wonder kids don't want to learn music fundementals and theory.
When I was 12 I was walking home from town, (about 5 miles) after the movie and as I walked past this country tavern I heard the most amazing music coming out the window. It was swing, and I loved it. I could see the piano player and I knew who he was. I was at his house the next day begging him to give me piano lessons to learn to play his "STUFF". He shoo'd me away time after time. You see that is the problem then and now. The good musicians don't want to teach kids their craft. They only want to gig and make the big bucks.
I badgered this honky tonk piano player for months until her finally relented but only after I threatened to burn his house down when he wasn't home.
He taught me to play his "Stuff", and I found out that I actually loved music and have been playing every since. I put my first band together as a sophmore in highschool, about age 16. I studied horns, accordion, and organ also. I taught kids for a couple of years. I went through college working in a piano bar 6 nights a week.
I see that there are two problems to kids learning music today. Their parents and the lack of teachers that will satisfy both the parent and the kid.
That is my 10 cents worth for what it is worth if in fact it is worth anything
Best to all
PS: After Reading Ric's Post following mine, it occurred to me that I ought to add.
I raised 8 kids. They were constantly sourrounded by music, mine and others. We had lots of jam sessions in our rec room.
One son took up Organ. I would not teach him and got a teacher for him. He soon switched to Trumpet. These were two instruments I played. You can read between the lines here. He then swithced to guitar which he took to like a duck to water. In the last 35 years he has become an accomplished musician and band owner/leader.
The rest of the kids. Two of them in their mid adult years took up the piano with lessons. They are almost competent parlor players. The rest of them? They play CD's and have no desire to play an instrument but when they come here they want me to play for hours on end. Go figure?
Bebop

[This message has been edited by BEBOP (edited 12-02-2004).]

I have three daughters, currently 9, 13 and 17, and I pushed all three to music.

Sara is 17 and learned piano from 6 to 12, then she discovered her passion for flute, so she reduced her piano effort, moving to the flute, where now she's pretty good. But, apart from the instrument, I am very satisfied about her knowledge of music, her ability to read music and play with apparently no effort.

This same situation applies to Marta, the 13 one, which started harp when she was 7. With highs and lows she's still learning with very good results: she won a couple of contests and she's very "musical" if you know what I mean. Now she started to discover classic guitar, but harp is still her main instrument.

Finally, the little one, Camilla, who started violin 2 years ago and alredy reads music as I read messages in this forum.

Why have I told you all this? Because there is a big, extremely big effort on parents side. I stressed them for years about how good is music and how good is knowing it and how good is achieving the ability of playing an instruments. There has been highs and lows, and they have been about to dismiss a couple of time, but we all have supported each other and still they are.

So, todays generation suffers from that "everything and now" instant gratification, but we (parents, I mean) have to play our parts.