From nevileb Sent Mon, Jul 20th 1998, 19:55
>> Is there a good reason for their secrecy, or can I >> assume that it's simply sonic-insecurity? > > I imagine for the same reason Basic Channel don't give out > their gear list: there's already way too many people biting > their sound already -- why make it any easier? One of the > reasons certain pieces of gear change hands for absurd > amounts is because all too many people seem to think > amassing the same gear as musicians they enjoy will > allow them to make music that sounds like them. I agree - it's silly to think that buying the same gear as ae or Aphex will make you sound like them. You may be able to recreate sounds they've used, but the writing is a different issue. Having said that, my question remains - why the secrecy? If, in the artistry of creating the tracks, the gear is of *central* importance, I may have to re-assess my feelings towards these artists. How would I feel about a phenomenal painter who refused to tell anyone about the spectacular brush he uses? My estimation of his artistic skills would certainly get smaller. Perhaps electronic music still has a long way to mature. It seems to me that the equipment secrecy is nothing but selfishness and insecurity. It would be ridiculous for Chick Corea to not tell anyone what synths he used on his last album, or for him to not talk about his creative process at all. If the gear list is of such importance, we can only assume that the artists themselves believe their sound can be easily reproduced. If that's the case, maybe what they're doing isn't worthy of the respect we give it. Of course, as somebody else already said, who cares? We know they're the original masters. So what don't they want us to know? bbn