Re: what a loop has to say

[Doug Cox <dougcox@pdq.net>]

I would agree with you, if that was the only point that was being made 
in this thread.  It's not.  There's a lot of direct and indirect bashing 
of the possible artistic output from musicians who don't meet some sort 
of "grade" regarding technical ability on their instrument.  I do not 
agree with that stance, and I'm simply saying what I believe.

I consider myself an above average guitar player, within the styles that 
I like to play.  But that doesn't mean that I apply a lesser value to 
the artistic output of someone who can't play well, uses effects to 
accomplish their mission, etc.  If the output is something that matches 
with my tastes - then I consider it priceless.

D

Kevin wrote:

> At 08:27 AM 3/17/2006, you wrote:
>
>> I think this is a great point.  When you start down this path of 
>> invalidating an artistic expression because of how it was created, 
>> and create some sort of continuum of "good/artistic" vs. 
>> "bad/generated by 'gear'", then you might come to the conclusion that 
>> you can only be valid by standing naked in front of the audience, 
>> using only the voice/body to create.  While this might be interesting 
>> (!), it's not the only valid, artistic, or "good" way to create music.
>
>
> This discussion is developing a dichotomy that isn't constructive. 
> Kind of like most discussions about religion.
>
> It's all music, we all make music, let's accept that as a given.  The 
> original thread had to do with Kris's conflict about his technique 
> (effects) getting in the way of his creativity.  This is a valid 
> artistic concern which really needs to be answered individually by 
> each of us in our own hearts.  There's no right answer here, there is 
> no answer that applies to all of us.  It's just part of the creative 
> process.
>
> Cheers,
> Kevin
>
> The Nettles: Progressive and Exciting Celtic Music
> www.TheNettles.com
>
>