Synthetic strings, artificial oboes, machine‑made drums... Ian Stewart wants us to stop faking it and get real — or go all the way and fake it completely.
When I used to work in middle‑of‑the‑road restaurant bands playing Continental music, one of the highest compliments a keyboard player could receive was 'Shut your eyes and you'd think you were listening to an orchestra...'. You, of course, were not. What you were probably listening to was a fistful of Elka string sounds in the left hand and a Fender Rhodes piano theme in the right. Obviously, the string machine didn't sound like an orchestra — and was none the worse for it. What it did sound like was a unique electronic instrument, one that gave Continental pop music exactly the right feel. My personal favourite was the ARP Quadra strings and I always loved, but didn't have access to Roland string and choir sounds. In fact, the very name 'string machine' is just right — an electronic instrument that fulfils the same role as a string section but uses different, electronic, sounds. In any case, most pop string arrangements just consist of sustained chords or some sort of counter‑theme — very different from the sophisticated writing you'll hear on, say, Frank Sinatra records, for which real string sections are essential.
In many ways, the early keyboard setup of mid‑'70s jazz‑rock players was a classic combination of electronic keyboard sounds: Fender Rhodes piano, a solo synthesizer such as a Minimoog, a string machine, and probably a Clavinet as well. None of these sounded like other instruments, even if they were intended to; they were new sounds. Likewise, the drum machines failed to sound like real drums, but became classic for what they really were: new electronic sounds. Electro wouldn't have been the same without the TR808 or DMX. As for the 909 kick drum, the story is so well known that I don't need to repeat it here. This is the ideal state of electronic music: electronic sounds are used because what's wanted is — electronic sounds.
Unfortunately, the technology got better, to the point where electronic instruments could imitate real, acoustic, instruments — not very well, but enough to convince a lot of people. Now house, techno, and drums and bass use sampled strings and digital pianos, but the majority of their sounds are electronic, and the producers mix established sounds of the idiom with new sounds produced through programming or processing. Listening to this music, there's no doubt in your mind that you're listening to electronic music, from the 909 kick drum, distorted house organ, and scratching, to the ever‑present filter sweeps, often over an entire section of a mix. Even though expression is put into dance music and the producers do often aim at a human feel, the overwhelming sensation is that of machine music, and it's all the better for it — it's genuine, true to the instruments, and, by being uniquely electronic, often transcends the medium. The good producers, composers and remixers work within the strict limitations of the style creatively.
But compare this with the often terrible arrangements, synthesized versions of acoustic lead instruments, and artificial sampled strings of straightforward pop and television music. Even the drum sounds are wrong — they're supposed to sound real, but are obviously machine‑made. Why would anyone who has worked with real musicians choose a synth substitute? And why should the music business be able to get away with things other businesses can't — could you add flavouring to sparkling mineral water and call it champagne? Could you put a fibreglass imitation of an Italian sports car body on an old Austin A40 chassis and pass it off as a Ferrari? When you imitate a real instrument, you're using something fake and cheap in every sense of the word. Why not use an unique electronic sound instead? Well, one reason seems to be that we don't really like genuine electronic sounds any more: what we like is a cheap imitation of an acoustic instrument with an electronic gloss on it. The other reason, of course, is money.
These days, the keyboardist's compliment should be 'Shut your eyes and you'd think you were listening to an orchestra, until you open them and see that you're only paying for one musician'. You can cut the cost of professional studio work if you use synthesized sounds instead of real ones: you don't need musicians or an arranger. Studios, composers and companies who can afford to use real instruments have very little excuse. Apart from a not‑very‑well‑paid New Wave group I knew some time ago who claimed that they used a drum machine because drum machines do not have girlfriend problems, the reasons for using synthesizers are neither amusing nor convincing. Among the excuses I have heard are that someone couldn't get a harp up the stairs to the studio, or that the arranger made a bad job of the string parts and so a session was wasted. No one will admit that the real reason is stinginess.
And it's not just the professionals. Recording in your bedroom, you can have all the instruments you desire, albeit in an artificial, not very convincing, form. (You could add a synthesized orchestral track, a soya burger, and a blow‑up doll, and have the complete ersatz evening.) You can't afford to employ large numbers of musicians? Neither can I. But musical opportunities are immense in every area. If it's only possible to employ one musician other than yourself, use the strengths of that duo rather than bemoaning weaknesses. Think how many classical composers wrote for solo instruments or duos through choice — unaccompanied cello, violin and piano, flute and harp. There's great music for string quartet; fantastic tunes for solo guitar. Would the classic '50s Miles Davis Sextet have been better if they'd been seven? Would the Art Tatum, Bill Evans or Keith Jarrett solo recordings have been better with another musician added?
So throw away your General MIDI modules and your sample CDs of string orchestras and ethnic instruments. Using your synthesizer to replicate 'real' instruments, or looping a sample, should be a last resort. If you want an instrumental sound, use a musician. And if you can't get a musician, think of something else. You've got the technology to extend your musical palette: electronic sounds are unique and wonderful, and the possibilities they offer a composer are immense.
Ian Stewart has been a freelance composer and musician since 1978. He has written pieces for saxophone quartet, soprano and tape, saxophone, piano and string orchestra, stereo tape, and soprano sax, cello and piano, and has had his work broadcast on Radio 3 and performed in Amsterdam, Zürich and London and on BBC TV.