mee3d wrote:I'm not too sure if the common man want's objective descriptions, and you are right, I have not witnessed such an item in the analog synth world. If you take the most popular synth publications on the market today thay all reflect some individuals perception, whether it be Mark Vail or Peter Forrest etc, to date I only think someone like Gordon Reid would be fit for the task as he tends to be pretty objective (IMO) but I doubt Gordon would take on a task from a business point of view.
Well, I have a problem with how media, products, etc. tend to pander to the petty wants and desires of the general public. The "if I give them what they want, I'll make MONEY" attitude. There was a time when this wasn't the case, of course... it used to be "if I give them what they need to know, they will give me money." It may be too late for such things, but.. ah, well.
The effects of giving the people what they want (ala VSE) are quite evident on the internet. The history of electronic music is being horribly skewed into a viewpoint that is taken purely from a very current perspective... without any sort of context or understanding of the culture of the times when these products were actually made. If I never made a cent, I would still be happy with creating a site that had an academic portrayal of the devices. This is, however, not to say that it wouldn't be gorgeous and cool and entertaining.
I love Gordon Reid!
mee3d wrote:By making something so academic you are surely limiting your demographic which is fine if you want to go down as the guy that made a great product but not so good for the money making.
Absolutely. I consider my YouTube videos (such as they are) academic, in that the devices functionality and sound is demonstrated in a manner that does not force a specific genre or musical perspective... does not rely on baseless hyperbolic adjectives (doesn't RELY I said, hee), etc. Still... while you might think that a run through of the functionality of any given synth would bore you to tears (I think it would, too) people are interested, and say so. (even people who say "I can't believe I was just entertained by 10 minutes of synth explanation") While I know this isn't a giant demographic, it gives hope that there is interest.
Again... it isn't necessarily about the money making.
mee3d wrote:Isn't it synth fans that buy into this type of product anyway?
There are a number of different varieties of "synth fan." It's possible to market to all of them without pandering to the lowest-common-demonimator. Right now, the newest generation of synth fan is being taught that an analog synthesizer is some old limited thing that can make "great leads and basses, but that's about it." They are led to believe that all electronic instruments were and are made for techno, and that analog synths are difficult, unreliable, etc. If, perhaps, they received a more accurate portrayal of history, analog synths, and what they do, perhaps more of them would be interested... and informed.
mee3d wrote:You sound like you are ahead of the game if you have the content and the skills to build such a product but In my experience, having the raw content is one thing, turning that material into a professional product is something different.
mee3d wrote:I know most people do not count their time working on personal projects but if you are to create a business model and make some money then you should, it's this point that you'll find most people who have tried to create something like this end up being bitter about the time involved and the lack of income.
I am an analog enthusiast. I am driven by a philosophy, and a perceived lack. I'm not looking for a job, I make what I need from freelance composition and web design. The point at which I feel like I am not getting what I need from any project I pursue, I stop pursuing it. I personally believe that all great work starts from an interest in that work, not an interest in what can be made from the work.
mee3d wrote:Just because it's possible now to edit video to professional standards using a desktop computer and it's relatively easy to put home made videos online doesn't mean the skills are there to make something interesting, professional and profitable... as much as I like the YouTube wave of 'fan based' synth demos (because I too am a fan of synths), they are a long way from being professional.
This argument is the same argument I might use if I said "just because you can make music in your home these days doesn't mean it's going to be GOOD or POPULAR music..." But as with any art form, skill, experience, and quality may not be the defining factors of something that is enjoyed or becomes popular.
As one of the first "fan-based" synth demo people, I would state that the goal in YouTube synth-demoing is not placing the demo in a context that would appeal to a movie director or corporate executive. I am well aware that my lighting is often terrible, that I am currently only using a single angle, that the compression software I use is crap, and that YouTube's compression process makes a bad thing worse... however, my goal is being met... and also being met with enjoyment, approval, and support. Call it Lo-Fi Video, if you must.
mee3d wrote:This happened in the web development world some years back with the advent of easy build website applications and now everyone with a little computer knowledge can build a website but it takes a lot more then just a few clicks to build something that ticks all the boxes for clients and a large percentage of 'web developers' don't have the background knowledge to understand why certain restraints have to happen (or not as the case may be).
Yep, that's me too. I've designed websites professionally for the past 9 years... I've never taken a single web-developing class. There is a very great deal I do not know. However, somehow... people seem to be interested enough in the sites that I have made to pursue my business.
While there are plenty of websites built by those who speak code fluently... that are 100% designed to fit all protocols and feature the most appropriate use of functionality, there are also beautiful and expressive and effective websites that do not.
Again... do I tell a punk musician that the inversion of chord they're using does not follow proper voice leading principles and results in an awkward transition? Do I tell analog synth users that if they don't know what each component in analog synthesizers do or how they work that they're not actually creating music? Well, yes, I do... but that's not the point.
mee3d wrote:I do understand what you are trying to acheive and I think you are right in that there is probably a need for such a product but I know both Peter Forrest and Martin Newcomb (and others in the field) and I know that they have not really recouped the money invested into their products, if it's a labour of love then no need to worry ... just that somewhere in the previous threads someone said something about making money!
Just so you know, I currently have 2 synth related DVD products that I have been working on for the last 3 years... clearly not a money maker!
Ohh, I see... trying to dishearten the competition, are you? ; )
Kidding. I'm sure I wouldn't be competition at all... if I was intent on pursuing it. As it is, it's just something I would like to do... but not enough to have done it yet. But, if I did... I would be sure to do everything the way I think it should be... probably wholly incorrectly from a business standpoint... but that's the sort of entrepreneurial spirit that has often resulted in success. ::shrugs:: It's the same thing with the websites... my first websites were all graphics-laden and didn't use any html text at all. I was told they were all wrong... but I couldn't bear how websites in that day all looked like bad magazine publishing... so I made mine in photographic 3D... and, despite being "wrong," they were very popular... and led to income. (not a lot, mind you...