Jump to content

Musicians are the worst kind of dreamer


Zeitzbach
 Share

Recommended Posts

Oh god, you'd hate the music department at my school. Most of the time the dominant sound you can hear is people practicing like that. I'm quite good at tuning it out and ignoring it though so I'm not bothered by it. It's not so bad either because everybody is there voluntarily to practice, rather than being forced to listen like in your situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Nice cut for context simply because you felt it tickled you.

No one talked about not trying unless you will succeed. It's about no one other than yourself giving a damn about failures.

To ourselves, failures are lessons. This is true. However, to others, failures are still failures. If you continuosly fail and don't improve, it's saying something.

I cut to clarify what I take issue with. If you are just contending that these people should keep their failures to themselves, then why all the rhetoric about dead dreams and harsh reality? How can we hope to improve if not to involve others when we fail? Is this person performing for your approval? Are they planning on putting this on a resume after giving up?

Perhaps I misunderstand. Perhaps what we have hear is merely a failure to communicate. Perhaps, then, you should have kept this to yourself. :v

 

 

 

Edited by DrGravitas
Grammar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm gonna go back and address some of this seriously now that I can. I'm speaking from someone who is thnking in terms of music as a profession, not as a hobby or self-exploration. There are some things that would change on those principles, but for now I'm talking about music and training as a performer.

Even insecure art major waving around their 5-digit useless piece of paper like an autistic child trying to feel good about themselves is a lot more bearable. The sob journal, self-bitch and constant demand for praise cause of their god complex isn't annoying as listening to a person trying to get into music because "ACOUSTIC GUITAR? MORE LIKE... ACOOLTIC GUITAR."

karung karung karung kek kek kek kek bup bup

Hearing them swinging their hand randomly when they make a mistake to restart is fine the first few times. After the 30th time, fuck that. Hearing a certain part of the song you liked is good the first few time. After the 25th fail attempt to play the same part over and over, fuck that. Even mentally disabled tranny rages are a lot more bearable after the 20th time because at least they're funny when they're being stupid.

Unless you live alone, don't dream of becoming a musician. You're making it hell for everyone else while wasting as much time and money as art major doing the same cover over and over while not being creative and original.

Referring to your "whole thing wasn't about major to begin with", it's probably because you start by using a comparison of how much you hate them to how much you hate your roommate practicing. 

He should change his practice methods a little bit if he's doing it that way. A lot of people tend to try and just go over and over again without assessing the problem, what you're hearing is assured failure. If he stopped to figure out why he was making mistakes, he would make more progress as a musician. That much is an issue, because while repetition is necessary, it shouldn't be confused and frustrated repetition, otherwise you will never improve. You're not wrong that he's wasting time, but it's because he's assessing the craft completely wrong. Your derivative complaint of being a musician is more of a sign that you don't actually understand the source of the problem, because you think this is what all musicians go through. This is what people who struggle with their instruments go through; taking on more they can handle at a time and not improving the things that are actually causing them problems. (not to say I'd expect whoever you're currently complaining about to know this, but I hope they consider lessons so that they can get some outside feedback and learn methods for improvement)

Whole thing wasn't about major to begin with. The thread is supposed to be about musician buddy that suck after a whole year that loves to practice within earshot. It's just that the art majors decided they must take some stance on this and it turned into "You're bashing my major. UNACCEPTABLE!". I just play along because I know they never had any ground to stand on to begin with.

And people will label me as a shitposter anyway because I always use harsh reality instead of rose garden when forming an opinion.

 

Again, see first half of above comment. We can have a very long talk about the latter of me not having any ground to stand on in a minute. Interested to hear your justification. 

 

Your point about connections is irrelevant because that is literally the entire point of going into school as a composition/education major. They expose you and introduce you to fellow composers, educators, and so on. You learn techniques for your respective field, and even professional composers have pointed out that going to school for music isn't going to guarantee you become a great musician (if you work hard you might), but it will guarantee that you will be exposed to a lot of resources, connections, and experiences. And frankly, that isn't even enough, especially in performance. Orchestral auditions are 100% blind. I don't give a shit if you tried hard or if you went to Berklee, if even one note is just a hair less pristine than the other musicians auditioning here, you don't have a job. Experience and connection is not just for cheating on a resume, it's actually the only way you can get enough information and resources to get the job. (now will you need a good looking resume for music education? yes. but you have to have it based on principles of success and intelligent approaches, not just a list of good schools.) 

Name some of the Thai instruments you had to learn and if you can do it chronologically that'd be great. I suspect that this falls into a principle that you might not be very aware of, which I'll get to in a second. What you've mentioned about there not really being a class in America teaching people how to play instruments is a big part of the reason why so many people struggle with it. Whether or not you're aware, it's not actually the music that is easy, but the fact that you've been engrossed in it for so long. Homeschooled students are overwhelmingly outperforming students in public schools around here because they are given the time and resources to put an emphasis on musical techniques, and are often taking more lessons, being introduced to more ensembles. I would actually be willing to bet you may or may not be awful at several of the instruments you've mentioned or have a primely elementary understanding of them, but that statement isn't really relevant (or an insult for that matter. Seriously doubt you could get "good" beyond the basics in a year unless it's a certain instrument group) 

You're not wrong in saying that practice is important. You are wrong in saying that instruments are intuitive. If you can accurately explain rhythm, tone, intonation, guitar specific techniques such as picking, fingerings, dexterity control, and much more and have someone understand and demonstrate that in a matter of hours, then you'll be the first to ever do it.

Music is special in that there are a lot of ways to practice very bad habits and be stuck being incapable of playing what you want to for a long time. In that regard, hard work is useless without the right knowledge. Teachers and proper resourcing can expedite the amount of work it takes drastically and is the difference between someone who is gig ready by the time they are 20 versus someone who thinks they are at 28. You still have to practice a lot if you want to be decent, but I'll be damned if anything about this is permanently intuitive. I'm one of the fastest learning people in my studio, and even that much is apparent to me. It's strange to me that your education of music is actually entirely designed by teachers, yet you think that simply picking up an instrument with the limited background knowledge the American education system gives their students will go well.

Your last comment about needing to be able to succeed is also true but irrelevant, because music is not objectively all the same difficulty. The whole reason America has built a grading system for sheet music is because it gives teachers and students insight into whether or not they can choose a piece and perfect it. Even online tablature uses a similar notion, dictating the pieces you can succeed with versus the ones you can't. Most of the people who do what you're referring to (improve and fail) are almost always playing literature that is too hard for them to play well, or fall into the category of people we agree are going to fail, which is people who don't work very hard. 

"If you continuosly fail and don't improve, it's saying something."

The sad thing is that art and the performance arts fall into a paradox of perfection. There has never been an objectively perfect performance of anything, and anything short of perfection is, by most musicians' standards, a failure. Therefore by definition failure has to be defined by the ensemble, the listener, and the performer. If you play a piece of literature, success starts when you make it music that is accepted by your peers, your listeners, and yourself (the first two are debated when looking at musical performance for the sake of enjoyment). When you play literature that is past your skill level or is not something you can represent intelligently, you will always, always, fail. In saying that I don't think I disagree with you, I just think the reasons you're saying that are different than what the reality is for musicians.

And this does not change for non-orchestral musicians. You have to understand what you expect of yourself and meet it. Being a performer independent of the "play perfectly" mentality of orchestral musicians does not mean that you can sidle by without understanding exactly what you intend to create. Failing to understand what you're making dissuades an audience (should the money and opinion matter to you), and it can also mean you won't be able to really find the sound you're looking for as a musician. Just because you want to play rock n roll doesn't mean you can ignore how to make it.

Edited by evan
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

make me coffee and I'll pay you in love :>

if i make love, will you pay me in coffee?

This thread is awful,

This is why I art for fun C:

i love just taking in music and art. i do work to become someone who could enter a profession in music, but for certain i'd just like to enjoy it in the end.

The best baits in town. Ahah

i'd like to believe that if i can't respond to his trolling then i won't know what to do if i ever have to justify my profession.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

if i make love, will you pay me in coffee?

i love just taking in music and art. i do work to become someone who could enter a profession in music, but for certain i'd just like to enjoy it in the end.

i'd like to believe that if i can't respond to his trolling then i won't know what to do if i ever have to justify my profession.

I used to be a sketic in not wanting to do something that didnt have practical value, and wondered how so many pursued the arts which seemed in vain. However, I do know some talented musician and artist friends...and they're actually going somewhere, made my skepticism think twice.

Now I dont question what other people choose to do because you just dont know if they may end up getting what they want or need out of it. I just know, as a personal preference, I would want a profession more stable and practical in the workforce, but if I could hone my artistic skills for fun on the side and somehow earn extra profit, that'd be rad.

Just...serious major props to those in the arts and especially those who do well in it. You do you, peoples.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To reply to Evans without quoting a huge block.

On the ground part: This is mainly directed toward ART major.

The only thing said person could use to back the point up was that "STEM field will forever have shit looking UI in their stuffs without me" but that point is moot because I'm a STEM major with artistic background. What will they say in this case then to justify their major when it is possible to self-taught all the core without wasting money?

My point about connection is not irrelevant. 6tails brought up that even with failure, you will be hired which is wrong. If you wish to fail, fail in your spare time. The reality world is all about faces and successes. It's like being an actor. You can fail all you want during practice but on stage, you fail once and it's over for you unless you have a savior waiting. There is no "He failed alot so he is hired here so it's okay to fail and fail."

To name the instruments I was forced to learn in elementary and high school.

-That wood pipe thing you see people make fun of in manga about anime girl playing it.

-The portable plastic piano wanna be thing that you have to blow wind into if you wish for it to make sound.

-Both wood and bamboo Xylophone

-Zither

-The history drum something people use for sports event.

Outside the drum, there is at least 60 hours invested into each instrument. The drum had the least time because it's shared with folk dance and other art forms.

It's because i have a lot of background and time invested in muscle memory and hand coordination thanks to the classes + extra hours in order to get As on all of them (because it's either Approval or Belt in Asia) that I know I can pick up a new instrument and learn if needed by simply investing 4 hours into self-teaching every day until it's good.

If you wish to justify your major and profession, simply succeed and don't end up on the street or behind a counter serving coffee and McDonald like the 90% of the people that graduated from there. If you're still in class, show that you can make a living from what you love and learn in your spare time. It really doesn't matter what one try to say in whatever field they study. If they can't get a proper job, they will be buried. No theory will save you from hunger and minimum wage. I'm only cocky as hell because I already have options open the moment I graduate if I don't go for a master degree.

Edited by Zeitzbach
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I apologize in advance because this is another large post. 

To reply to Evans without quoting a huge block.

On the ground part: This is mainly directed toward ART major.

The only thing said person could use to back the point up was that "STEM field will forever have shit looking UI in their stuffs without me" but that point is moot because I'm a STEM major with artistic background. What will they say in this case then to justify their major when it is possible to self-taught all the core without wasting money?

My point about connection is not irrelevant. 6tails brought up that even with failure, you will be hired which is wrong. If you wish to fail, fail in your spare time. The reality world is all about faces and successes. It's like being an actor. You can fail all you want during practice but on stage, you fail once and it's over for you unless you have a savior waiting. There is no "He failed alot so he is hired here so it's okay to fail and fail."

To name the instruments I was forced to learn in elementary and high school.

-That wood pipe thing you see people make fun of in manga about anime girl playing it.

-The portable plastic piano wanna be thing that you have to blow wind into if you wish for it to make sound.

-Both wood and bamboo Xylophone

-Zither

-The history drum something people use for sports event.

Outside the drum, there is at least 60 hours invested into each instrument. The drum had the least time because it's shared with folk dance and other art forms.

It's because i have a lot of background and time invested in muscle memory and hand coordination thanks to the classes + extra hours in order to get As on all of them (because it's either Approval or Belt in Asia) that I know I can pick up a new instrument and learn if needed by simply investing 4 hours into self-teaching every day until it's good.

If you wish to justify your major and profession, simply succeed and don't end up on the street or behind a counter serving coffee and McDonald like the 90% of the people that graduated from there. If you're still in class, show that you can make a living from what you love and learn in your spare time. It really doesn't matter what one try to say in whatever field they study. If they can't get a proper job, they will be buried. No theory will save you from hunger and minimum wage. I'm only cocky as hell because I already have options open the moment I graduate if I don't go for a master degree.

 

I won't disagree with you on art just because I don't know the field very well.

Unfortunately, the topic of failure is not very set out in stone in music. It's just ambiguous. You're not wrong looking at the orchestral community. Fucking up a single note means you're out, no gig, get out. But the difficult thing is that you have to ask what is practice and what is -really- performance. Failure in a lot of places is actually necessary perspective, unfortunately, and to your point it may become practice since you're not getting hired, but people going through the audition process a thousand times is how they get hired. It may not be acceptable to fail as a member of the group, but the contrary of that is that failure is entirely necessary to even get that far. Most people who don't fail more often than they succeed usually end up "peaking" before they get that far and don't manage to hold up once they are forced to potentially fail. Those who know how to fail also know how to succeed, so your argument is a double-edged sword. Most people who end up being in the most successful orchestras in the world have the capacity to be there because they got rejected from who-knows-how-many places. 

Alright so it sounds like at least half of those instruments are diatonic (probably pentatonic) or atonal. Your education was sustained with things that most American kids (especially ones like your anecdotal friend who is struggling radically with guitar) don't get, which is a great deal of isolated musical ideas. Playing only drums teaches rhythm at a different level of focus. Most students here learn rhythm the same time as fingerings, as there are a lot of kids who are not required to be in music until they are 11-12, and that is when instrumental band starts, to which percussion is actually the instrument you have to audition for. 

Look I could go on but I'll cut the bullshit. Your education was really good but was cumulatively between all of those instruments many many hours of work. Due to the way music is treated in America, most people jump into a new instrument in America with almost no hours of experience. The reason your anecdotal friend is shit is because unlike you, he has no precedent for this information. Of course the instrument is going to be difficult for him as a result. Information is difficult when it is presented in a way that is difficult or not explained clearly. Sounds obvious, right? Well, unfortunately with what you've said about instruments being "not that hard" to learn, I feel this needs to be clarified.

Frankly man I know musicians who are self sustaining and taking classes. I also know people who go through phases of making no money, then turn around and end up exactly where they need to be. I do not disagree with you. I really don't. I just see what you say and there are attitudes that I catch on to that make me concerned or give me the impression that you've only seen enough musical failures to feel that we all are lazy slobs.

Also keep in mind most education majors at the school I go to end up with a job without a Master's as well. Even performance majors get teaching jobs often. Their success rate was over 90% last they presented that information. So I will say that I'm not super concerned about that.

Edited by evan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Since you're making claims, I'm going to call the prove-it rule. Go get a guitar and prove you can even come close to my level in one year.

The article mainly talks about "There isn't a big enough pool to choose from so we might as well go with the most experienced one."

And you're making it sound like wasting a whole year in order to obtain approval from a nobody that isn't beneficial in anyway is a good thing. You made a bad choice, don't ask me to follow. This is why musicians really are the worst kind of dreamer. They're overestimating their future position and think they will receive the same treatment as the bigshots. ha. We are all gold fishes in a pond, not fancy expensive koi fish.

Edited by Zeitzbach
Link to comment
Share on other sites

People get "forced" to learn instruments in elementary and high school in some places?

My, I'm jelly.

Asian. You learn everything and take cram school later especially if you are around when they actually HIT YOU WITH FUCKING WOODEN RULER BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T DO THAT GREAT ON THE HOMEWORK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And you're making it sound like wasting a whole year in order to obtain approval from a nobody that isn't beneficial in anyway is a good thing. You made a bad choice, don't ask me to follow. This is why musicians really are the worst kind of dreamer. They're overestimating their future position and think they will receive the same treatment as the bigshots. ha. We are all gold fishes in a pond, not fancy expensive koi fish.

I think his point is more that your statement of "good" suggests that you think you will be of an acceptable ability level by the time you rehearse that much. His challenge is to suggest that your attitude is unjustified unless you really can demonstrate that you understand the instrument well enough to demonstrate it professionally. Being able to play "good" is fine, but it somewhat undermines the point of his statements because your standards only seem to go to "I sound good playing some things". You may be passable compared to someone who doesn't know the instrument, but in the scope of a musician's society you would probably need to put more on the table than that.

If anything, you're ironically demonstrating what you think musicians behave like. You think your experience gives you enough credibility to talk shit about the craft. It's just kind of strange to listen to, honestly.

I do find skill to be a bit of an arbitrary argument because we should just enjoy music, but since we're trying to have a discussion about employment, that is something that matters deeply.

Edited by evan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except I'm already holding my career in STEM, nimrod. I've been playing guitar for 20 years.

The article still demonstrates that despite failure, people still get hired. It still directly counters your claims.

I'm still holding you to your claims. Back them up.

And it shows that because they have connection and being in a smaller pool, they get hired and that's the major reason. It's because they have experience and the whole thing is more of a "there's no other choice". You can't apply the same case to our position. Like I said, we are still gold fishes. They are Koi fishes. Just because a Koi fish is expensive doesn't mean the other gold fishes will be too. A failed gold fish is a dead gold fish even if it tries to imitate a koi fish.

And man, 20 years. That's at least 8000 practice hours down the drain, almost enough to nearly master an actually useful talent. It shows because you're in a STEM career anyway even with so many years into it. Imagine if you had taken another STEM-related stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And man, 20 years. That's at least 8000 practice hours down the drain, almost enough to nearly master an actually useful talent. It shows because you're in a STEM career anyway even with so many years into it. Imagine if you had taken another STEM-related stuff.

Define useful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the biggest problems with this thread is that you completely failed to mention in the very first post that you're bitching about your guitar buddy, and then proceeded to take a good, steamy piss of a generalization on arts majors.

Not sure who jizzed on your cinnamon roll, but your rant was fucked the moment you created the thread.

Additionally, you mentioned having been educated in Thai schools. Wildly assuming you're sitting in good ol' Murrika right now, and the US education field, for the most part, disregards the arts as anything worth teaching. Public schools are given a blip of a music or art class, and if you have a school that KEEPS these programs, you get a chance to study the media in school. Poor fag schools, however, eliminate these programs altogether. So unless your parents can afford lessons for you, or you're up for some frustrating practice sessions watching Youtube musicians, you're fucked until you get into university.

Edited by Ratmomma
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"It's because they have experience and the whole thing is more of a "there's no other choice""

I run a business as well. There's another choice - don't hire anyone and delegate the tasks amongst the current staff or get someone from the board of directors (assuming you have one.)

"Imagine if you had taken another STEM-related stuff."

I don't need to, as I'm already involved in five STEM fields.

 

Big or small.

Actually involved or just randomly passed through involved.

Because most grads that came back talk about owning business and stuffs all end up being disappointing as hell and are still no names up even after 3 years. That beginner game code with "high" level math you presented threads ago don't really give your claims much credit.

Define useful.

Stable future, growth, reward with low risk. Music is risky. That's why it can only serve as secondary source until you can somehow create a stable fanbase for it. Picking it as a primary option is worthless.

One of the biggest problems with this thread is that you completely failed to mention in the very first post that you're bitching about your guitar buddy, and then proceeded to take a good, steamy piss of a generalization on arts majors.

Not sure who jizzed on your cinnamon roll, but your rant was fucked the moment you created the thread.

You're making it sound like those major can be justified to begin with anyway. If only they will get used to the fact that not every one life is worth the same already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Big or small.

Actually involved or just randomly passed through involved.

Because most grads that came back talk about owning business and stuffs all end up being disappointing as hell and are still no names up even after 3 years. That beginner game code with "high" level math you presented threads ago don't really give your claims much credit.

Stable future, growth, reward with low risk. Music is risky. That's why it can only serve as secondary source until you can somehow create a stable fanbase for it. Picking it as a primary option is worthless.

You're making it sound like those major can be justified to begin with anyway. If only they will get used to the fact that not every one life is worth the same already.

I swear you must have been raised in the incest ridden Deep South. That's the only thing to possibly explain your blatant ignorance.

You wouldn't last 5 fucking seconds on /b/.

Edited by Ratmomma
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do people really use the STEM acronym outside of discussions like these? When someone asks you what you do, do you ever actually answer with "STEM"? Honestly, I have trouble even beginning to take seriously anything involving that much aggregation. Within my own field, career trajectories vary dramatically depending on the level of degree, the corresponding institutions, and even the particular discipline.

I would think that someone apparently so invested in ``STEM'' would focus more on concreteness. Arguments should be adequately defined; otherwise no one will know what the heck you're even trying to say, as evidenced by your repeated attempts at clarification in the latter portions of this thread.

(Note: This is addressed at Zeitzbach, in case clarification is necessary.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And unless you're impersonating someone else, your name is associated with a lot of fine art and a patreon.

"You're making it sound like those major can be justified to begin with anyway. If only they will get used to the fact that not every one life is worth the same already."

So unless you're an impostor, aren't you yourself seeking financial gain thru a major you so deeply (apparently) resent?

he's from like indonesia or something

dont be racist

0.o?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do people really use the STEM acronym outside of discussions like these? When someone asks you what you do, do you ever actually answer with "STEM"? Honestly, I have trouble even beginning to take seriously anything involving that much aggregation. Within my own field, career trajectories vary dramatically depending on the level of degree, the corresponding institutions, and even the particular discipline.

I would think that someone apparently so invested in ``STEM'' would focus more on concreteness. Arguments should be adequately defined; otherwise no one will know what the heck you're even trying to say, as evidenced by your repeated attempts at clarification in the latter portions of this thread.

(Note: This is addressed at Zeitzbach, in case clarification is necessary.)

I would change it to Software and Knowledge but Art hate STEM in general anyway.

I swear you must have been raised in the incest ridden Deep South. That's the only thing to possibly explain your blatant ignorance.

You wouldn't last 5 fucking seconds on /b/.

Just rip their paper and they will say "nothing of value was lost."

And unless you're impersonating someone else, your name is associated with a lot of fine art and a patreon.

"You're making it sound like those major can be justified to begin with anyway. If only they will get used to the fact that not every one life is worth the same already."

So unless you're an impostor, aren't you yourself seeking financial gain thru a major you so deeply (apparently) resent?

It's on the side and it goes to show you don't need to waste money in that major to earn something from it. It also means I won't have to hire artists for game asset since I can do it on my own anyway. Doubled the value.

"Big or small.

Actually involved or just randomly passed through involved."

All of the above. I have the life experience, been there, done that from bottom to top. From research director to contract grunt.

If only you have vibe and aura all the bosses and professor I talk to actually have that make you want to listen to their life stories and successes.

Because this feels really dull.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then why do you bash the major so passionately, if you clearly are in it for pleasure and monetary gain? What's your point in shitting all over everyone else? You're not internationally recognized, you're not widely recognized on FA or DA, and so like the other 95% of artists just like yourself, you rely on selling your work as a business and an asset of value, yet you devalue all art in every single comment you've made.

Additionally, where's this game of yours you talk about? Where's the sketches? Coding? Teaser trial uploaded anywhere?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then why do you bash the major so passionately, if you clearly are in it for pleasure and monetary gain? What's your point in shitting all over everyone else? You're not internationally recognized, you're not widely recognized on FA or DA, and so like the other 95% of artists just like yourself, you rely on selling your work as a business and an asset of value, yet you devalue all art in every single comment you've made.

I don't bash the arts. I bash the major and people that treat it as primary instead of secondary source of income. I bash it because only idiots pay to learn art when it's something you should pick on your own else you're just doing something completely influenced by something that is not you.

Just look at all the top art grad and artists. They all draw the same shits. Just like how art major just rub the same techniques and tricks into everyone mind and produce the same kind of artists. Only once in awhile do you get people with an actual unique style that you can still admire. The others just lose your respect 2 months in.

Edited by Zeitzbach
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't bash the arts. I bash the major and people that treat it as primary instead of secondary source of income. I bash it because only idiots pay to learn art when it's something you should pick on your own else you're just doing something completely influenced by something that is not you.

Just look at all the top art grad and artists. They all draw the same shits. Just like how art major just rub the same techniques and tricks into everyone mind and produce the same kind of artists. Only once in awhile do you get people with an actual unique style that you can still admire. The others just lose your respect 2 months in.

Everything you've said bashes the arts. If a person wants to think they can depend on being an independent artist in a content saturated, global economy, then it's not the art school learning environment to blame: it's the person for completely failing to understand Business 101. I don't know what school pissed you off, but my university, from day 1, beat into our skulls that,

You will not make money.

You will struggle.

Unless you make it big, and less than 2% ever do, you cannot make your art your primary income.

And as far as all the work looking the same because they went to university.. speaking as someone that went to university: that's a hock of shit. If you have a professor that doesn't encourage a student's individual skill, that's the fault of the professor, not the school. Our professors took the time to see what the individual skills and potentials a student had, and fostered them. They encouraged unique work, they encouraged us to "break the rules, as long as you know what you're doing".

Someone pissed you off, and now you're acting like a spoiled brat and pissing on everything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just realised when Zeitz is blasting art majors he's mostly being critical of FINE art majors, and not the more general definition that includes the liberal arts/humanities/social sciences (but maybe he's critical of these people too). I don't know if this changes anything any but maybe other people jumped to the second definition too ok alright bye~~~

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do people really use the STEM acronym outside of discussions like these? When someone asks you what you do, do you ever actually answer with "STEM"? Honestly, I have trouble even beginning to take seriously anything involving that much aggregation. Within my own field, career trajectories vary dramatically depending on the level of degree, the corresponding institutions, and even the particular discipline.

I would think that someone apparently so invested in ``STEM'' would focus more on concreteness. Arguments should be adequately defined; otherwise no one will know what the heck you're even trying to say, as evidenced by your repeated attempts at clarification in the latter portions of this thread.

(Note: This is addressed at Zeitzbach, in case clarification is necessary.)

I've never heard the term 'STEM' outside of discussions like this and every other post on reddit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Big or small.

Actually involved or just randomly passed through involved.

Because most grads that came back talk about owning business and stuffs all end up being disappointing as hell and are still no names up even after 3 years. That beginner game code with "high" level math you presented threads ago don't really give your claims much credit.

Stable future, growth, reward with low risk. Music is risky. That's why it can only serve as secondary source until you can somehow create a stable fanbase for it. Picking it as a primary option is worthless.

You're making it sound like those major can be justified to begin with anyway. If only they will get used to the fact that not every one life is worth the same already.

just wanna take a moment to acknowledge the fact that you are talking about the music industry, not music as a profession. Professional performance does not require "fanbase", and for that matter you can actually make a decent living in a lot of settings that are entirely irrelevant to what you're referring to~

If you pick "playing guitar in a band" with no connections, no production background, and no understanding of resources or publishing, then yeah get the fuck out lol, but amazingly enough the musical job industry is actually significantly more diverse than that, ranging from therapy to classical performance to education, professorial study, private instruction, film scoring, etc. Your attitude says "freelance" to which nobody, NOBODY in their right mind who is looking to be a professional musician does that. Fanbase is irrelevant to professional music opportunities.

I don't see why you keep bringing up this whole "not every one life is worth the same" philosophy. It's barely relevant and isn't justified by your loose opinions on music.

the argument has stopped though so i'll stop replying after this.

edit: well i do need to add, STEM education is now incorporating the arts, so uh...trolololol

Edited by evan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many arts are things which are inherently science-based. Music works with frequencies, intervals, harmonics, etc. These same musical principles translate well to understanding other areas, like radio transmission, as some principles are the same.

i am just glad that the principles are at least being recognized. this will change the face of music in america in a very good way, hopefully

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many arts are things which are inherently science-based. Music works with frequencies, intervals, harmonics, etc. These same musical principles translate well to understanding other areas, like radio transmission, as some principles are the same.

In theory I agree, but my ex-roommate was an engineering major who used to tell me my doodles and drawings could all be boiled down to maths. That knowledge didn't really help him when I handed him my sketchbook and a pencil.

But I agree, geometry is pretty useful in visual arts.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...