All music is real. It doesn't matter if it's canaries chirping or someone tapping a beat on a bucket. Just because someone doesn't like it, doesn't mean it's "fake".

I think it is all real too. But in the context, I would say that people tend to define it as people making it themselves in real time, rather than programming it into a computer and pressing a button to play it.

But you have to play it in order to get it into a sequencer, more or less, so the line is fuzzy, IMO.

Also, I suppose "real" might be described as an instrument that creates it's own sound, and is then recorded by a microphone, rather than a computer which simulates a sound. But that is also a murky line.

I don't fall on either side, I like both "real" music and "fake" music

NDRU said:

I think it is all real too. But in the context, I would say that people tend to define it as people making it themselves in real time, rather than programming it into a computer and pressing a button to play it.

But you have to play it in order to get it into a sequencer, more or less, so the line is fuzzy, IMO.

Also, I suppose "real" might be described as an instrument that creates it's own sound, and is then recorded by a microphone, rather than a computer which simulates a sound. But that is also a murky line.

I don't fall on either side, I like both "real" music and "fake" music

Bowls and plates can be made by hand or a machine. People don't call a bowl made by a machine a fake bowl. I don't think that is what some people mean by real music anyway. They mean that some music they like rather than music that is mainstream popular.

MickyDolenz said:

NDRU said:

I think it is all real too. But in the context, I would say that people tend to define it as people making it themselves in real time, rather than programming it into a computer and pressing a button to play it.

But you have to play it in order to get it into a sequencer, more or less, so the line is fuzzy, IMO.

Also, I suppose "real" might be described as an instrument that creates it's own sound, and is then recorded by a microphone, rather than a computer which simulates a sound. But that is also a murky line.

I don't fall on either side, I like both "real" music and "fake" music

Bowls and plates can be made by hand or a machine. People don't call a bowl made by a machine a fake bowl. I don't think that is what some people mean by real music anyway. They mean that some music they like rather than music that is mainstream popular.

I think you're right, that when a lot of people refer to real or fake, they think of the manufactured glossy pop mainstream music as being fake.

Maybe it also has to do with who creates it. Like, who makes Beyonce's music? Not her. She has an army of writers and producers and musicians.

[Edited 2/16/12 13:21pm]

Oh, I did not read closely enough about what you were saying about bowls and plates

Yes I agree. That is why electronic music is still real music.

It is very silly when a certain some says "real music by real musicians" when that same person uses drum machines more often than live drums.

rialb said:

It is very silly when a certain some says "real music by real musicians" when that same person uses drum machines more often than live drums.

Yes, that is a big issue when it comes to defining this (if defining it is actually important).

In that particular case, I think you have a combination of the two. The I am sure nobody would refer to programmed drumbeats as being played by "the drummer"

But when you add non-programmed synth/keyboards, bass, guitar, and vocals on top of them, then even a cynical person would see it's mostly real. This is a contrast to some music which is mostly programmed, with vocals on top.

NDRU said:

Maybe it also has to do with who creates it. Like, who makes Beyonce's music? Not her. She has an army of writers and producers and musicians.

It doesn't matter who creates music or who performs it. It's still real. Milli Vanilli is still real music, even though Rob & Fab weren't the actual singers. I don't see how music can be fake. There are things that can be done with recorded music that are impossible otherwise (ie. singing with yourself or people who are dead or not in the same room), but the end result is still music.

Superficial music by Madonna & Britney is not real to me. I don't use that argument but I do agree with the basic point of it.

MickyDolenz said:

NDRU said:

Maybe it also has to do with who creates it. Like, who makes Beyonce's music? Not her. She has an army of writers and producers and musicians.

It doesn't matter who creates music or who performs it. It's still real. Milli Vanilli is still real music, even though Rob & Fab weren't the actual singers. I don't see how music can be fake. There are things that can be done with recorded music that are impossible otherwise (ie. singing with yourself or people who are dead or not in the same room), but the end result is still music.

I agree, I am referring to the perception of real vs. fake, not my own beliefs

Real music for me is simply an artist or band that can bring you the music

that they create in the studio and present it live with real instrumentation

which is rare air for the majority of newer artists out now.

As for what is fake music i won't even waste my time with it. If you don't know,

you'll never know. It's like comparing the Arena Football league to the NFL.

If you are a sports fan you will know which is real and which is bullshit

Something that DOESN'T exist. All music is real. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean that it isn't good.

phunkdaddy said:

Real music for me is simply an artist or band that can bring you the music

that they create in the studio and present it live with real instrumentation

Going by this, then a lot of what Prince releases is "fake", since it's doubtful he can play all of the instruments and all of the vocals at the same time in a concert. I don't think some The Beatles music can be played live either (at least not the way it is on record).

[Edited 2/16/12 14:01pm]

Any sound wave emitted is "music;" or, music is the arrangement of those emitted

sound waves into a system that is aurally pleasing. If that's true, then music is

normative and subjective.

duccichucka said:

Any sound wave emitted is "music;" or, music is the arrangement of those emitted

sound waves into a system that is aurally pleasing. If that's true, then music is

normative and subjective.

yes, music is "in the ear of the beholder."

I'm sure that is how it began, by hearing it rather than making it.

NDRU said:

duccichucka said:

Any sound wave emitted is "music;" or, music is the arrangement of those emitted

sound waves into a system that is aurally pleasing. If that's true, then music is

normative and subjective.

yes, music is "in the ear of the beholder."

I'm sure that is how it began, by hearing it rather than making it.

Right.

So not only is "music" in and of itself then a normative/subjective phenomenon,

but "good music" is as well.

MickyDolenz said:

phunkdaddy said:

Real music for me is simply an artist or band that can bring you the music

that they create in the studio and present it live with real instrumentation

Going by this, then a lot of what Prince releases is "fake", since it's doubtful he can play all of the instruments and all of the vocals at the same time in a concert. I don't think some The Beatles music can be played live either (at least not the way it is on record).

[Edited 2/16/12 14:01pm]

R U Serious? You are really reaching here.

You must really miss your upper level Philosophy courses.

phunkdaddy said:

Real music for me is simply an artist or band that can bring you the music

that they create in the studio and present it live with real instrumentation

which is rare air for the majority of newer artists out now.

As for what is fake music i won't even waste my time with it. If you don't know,

you'll never know. It's like comparing the Arena Football league to the NFL.

If you are a sports fan you will know which is real and which is bullshit

!!!!!!!!!!

Thats why I don't make this argument.

Real music=D'angelo

phunkdaddy said:

MickyDolenz said:

Going by this, then a lot of what Prince releases is "fake", since it's doubtful he can play all of the instruments and all of the vocals at the same time in a concert. I don't think some The Beatles music can be played live either (at least not the way it is on record).

R U Serious? You are really reaching here.

You must really miss your upper level Philosophy courses.

You said that "real" music is something that can be reproduced live. Tomorrow Never Knows by The Beatles wouldn't qualify by that definition, because other than Ringo's drumming, most of the song is random tape loops and effects.

I think people have a right to like what they like and music is subjective. But I do think their is such thing as real music and superficial music. Now, just because its superficial doesnt necessarily mean its bad because every music has its place. For example, while I wouldnt buy none of the music that plays on the radio I do party to it at a party or at a club but real music which I would define as music with alot more depth and requires you to think because of its complexity provides alot more to the listener. I think vocals, production, composition etc also is taken into account with this. I am so tired of people not being honest with the true context of real music and what is implied by it. OF COURSE, all music is real going by the perspective of it being tangible and that everyone is free to make it. However, their is such thing as good or bad music. Also, music with depth compared to generic music which most people imply when they say that.

mjscarousal said:

I think people have a right to like what they like and music is subjective. But I do think their is such thing as real music and superficial music. Now, just because its superficial doesnt necessarily mean its bad because every music has its place. For example, while I wouldnt buy none of the music that plays on the radio I do party to it at a party or at a club but real music which I would define as music with alot more depth and requires you to think because of its complexity provides alot more to the listener. I think vocals, production, composition etc also is taken into account with this. I am so tired of people not being honest with the true context of real music and what is implied by it. OF COURSE, all music is real going by the perspective of it being tangible and that everyone is free to make it. However, their is such thing as good or bad music. Also, music with depth compared to generic music which most people imply when they say that.

Personal taste doesn't make music real or fake. You're just saying something is good or bad to you. "Good" and "real" are two different things. The question is not whether music is good or bad, but how is one type of music real and another isn't? Music doesn't even have to be played with instruments. People play bottles, cans, washing boards, and many other things. Complex classical music is no more real than simple ringtone music. It's all music.

MickyDolenz said:

mjscarousal said:

I think people have a right to like what they like and music is subjective. But I do think their is such thing as real music and superficial music. Now, just because its superficial doesnt necessarily mean its bad because every music has its place. For example, while I wouldnt buy none of the music that plays on the radio I do party to it at a party or at a club but real music which I would define as music with alot more depth and requires you to think because of its complexity provides alot more to the listener. I think vocals, production, composition etc also is taken into account with this. I am so tired of people not being honest with the true context of real music and what is implied by it. OF COURSE, all music is real going by the perspective of it being tangible and that everyone is free to make it. However, their is such thing as good or bad music. Also, music with depth compared to generic music which most people imply when they say that.

Personal taste doesn't make music real or fake. You're just saying something is good or bad to you. "Good" and "real" are two different things. The question is not whether music is good or bad, but how is one type of music real and another isn't? Music doesn't even have to be played with instruments. People play bottles, cans, washing boards, and many other things. Complex classical music is no more real than simple ringtone music. It's all music.

You didnt read my post at all I made that distinction in my post and even said when people say real music in music discussions what they are really implying... Cans, washing boards, bottles could be seen and used a percussion, composition as well.. I in no way implied music stops in the studio

mjscarousal said:

MickyDolenz said:

Personal taste doesn't make music real or fake. You're just saying something is good or bad to you. "Good" and "real" are two different things. The question is not whether music is good or bad, but how is one type of music real and another isn't? Music doesn't even have to be played with instruments. People play bottles, cans, washing boards, and many other things. Complex classical music is no more real than simple ringtone music. It's all music.

You didnt read my post at all I made that distinction in my post and even said when people say real music in music discussions what they are really implying... Cans, washing boards, bottles could be seen and used a percussion, composition as well.. I in no way implied music stops in the studio

I did read your post. It's basically saying "Shakespere is deep and complex, so he's real and Jackie Collins romance novels are fluff, so she's not real". They both write stories. You're still saying that one is superior to another, which is an opinion to the reader. It's not the same as saying one writes real stories and the other writes fake stories.

MickyDolenz said:

mjscarousal said:

You didnt read my post at all I made that distinction in my post and even said when people say real music in music discussions what they are really implying... Cans, washing boards, bottles could be seen and used a percussion, composition as well.. I in no way implied music stops in the studio

I did read your post. It's basically saying "Shakespere is deep and complex, so he's real and Jackie Collins romance novels are fluff, so she's not real". They both write stories. You're still saying that one is superior to another, which is an opinion to the reader. It's not the same as saying one writes real stories and the other writes fake stories.

That wasnt a good analogy.

Heres a better one...thats like saying LL Cool Js music is fun to party to but Tupacs is more complex and requires you to think more so than dance to for enjoyment. Now personally, I think they are both great but I understand Tupac's material is far more deeper beyond the surface compared to LL's... now they both make real music...

Another example...

Lil Wayne makes shit rap compared to KRS Ones music... I wouldnt classify Lil Wayne as a serious artist who makes real music because he doesnt take his craft seriously... In YOUR opinion if you think ALL music you listen to is real as in how most people imply it than thats you... I dont. I already told you what most people are implying when they call something real music they imply its true or good.

You are trying to make real music more than just good or bad... and that I do agree with but I also do believe their IS such thing as real music and bad. I classify good music as being real as well.

Just because everyone makes music in a variety of ways doesnt mean its ALL good now that I do disagree with.

Mickey D I think you know what I mean

mjscarousal said:

Mickey D I think you know what I mean

Yeah, you're saying music is good or bad. You still haven't explained how 'making someone think' or 'party' makes music real or fake. An egg is an egg. It doesn't matter if it came from an ostrich or a chicken. If you eat both of them and like the way the chicken egg tastes better, it doesn't make the chicken egg more real than the ostrich's.

MickyDolenz said:

mjscarousal said:

Mickey D I think you know what I mean

Yeah, you're saying music is good or bad. You still haven't explained how 'making someone think' or 'party' makes music real or fake. An egg is an egg. It doesn't matter if it came from an ostrich or a chicken. If you eat both of them and like the way the chicken egg tastes better, it doesn't make the chicken egg more real than the ostrich's.

I did explain myself.

For the 3rd time I told you most people when they use the term real music they are implying of quality or deeper meaning than music that is just meant for dancing or entertainment. Nine times out of ten it doesnt have depth... However it is by default still music so it is real in that sense that you still hear sounds, someone singing, and lyrics but the context is much deeper that what you are arguing and you are very very intelligent and I think you know exactly what I am talking about. I think you are trying to get me to either understand your perspective on how you define real music and I DO understand it but I dont think you understand my point.

You are insisting a one sided view of looking at the term real music... a view that I even agreed with you but you are falling victim to your own arguement that you argue against.. That is YOUR opinion of how you view real and real music. Not everyone views it the same. I get your view and I perfectly explained why some people label music as real or not.

Some people categorize good, depth, quality AND real as the SAME thing when they discuss music in a much deeper sense THAT is WHY alot of music lovers, music conscience listerers use that term in discussions to make distincitions.

I GET that all music is real in the sense that ONCE AGAIN sounds are being made and someone is singing whether they can sing or not is another discussion but the term is much broader and deeper than the simple definition you are giving it. It means different things to different people.

Based on your agruement...

Both Soulja Boy and Stevie Wonder make real music. Your right they both DO make music but I disagree that they both make real music in the context that I explained and in which most people are implying when they use that term in music discussions

I do think this is a good thread by the way

[Edited 2/16/12 23:23pm]

MickyDolenz said:

mjscarousal said:

Mickey D I think you know what I mean

Yeah, you're saying music is good or bad. You still haven't explained how 'making someone think' or 'party' makes music real or fake. An egg is an egg. It doesn't matter if it came from an ostrich or a chicken. If you eat both of them and like the way the chicken egg tastes better, it doesn't make the chicken egg more real than the ostrich's.

OK, a plastic egg is still an egg, and it is real, so yes technically it might be a "real egg" but you would forgive someone for calling it a fake egg because if you could eat it, it would provide no real nutrition, and if you fertilized it and sat on it, it still would not hatch.

I don't believe there is anything such as "fake music" in actuality, but I believe there is in a figurative way

i think real music comes from the heart

that is the definition of real music

damn , i should copywrite that

NDRU said:

MickyDolenz said:

Yeah, you're saying music is good or bad. You still haven't explained how 'making someone think' or 'party' makes music real or fake. An egg is an egg. It doesn't matter if it came from an ostrich or a chicken. If you eat both of them and like the way the chicken egg tastes better, it doesn't make the chicken egg more real than the ostrich's.

OK, a plastic egg is still an egg, and it is real, so yes technically it might be a "real egg" but you would forgive someone for calling it a fake egg because if you could eat it, it would provide no real nutrition, and if you fertilized it and sat on it, it still would not hatch.

I don't believe there is anything such as "fake music" in actuality, but I believe there is in a figurative way

Sometimes Im not good at explaining things clearly.... good post.