MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index
 FAQ & Terms of UseFAQ & Terms Of Use   Wiggler RadioMW Radio   Muff Wiggler TwitterTwitter   Support the site @ PatreonPatreon 
 SearchSearch   RegisterSign up   Log inLog in 
WIGGLING 'LITE' IN GUEST MODE

Shifting from Computer Science to music - Help needed
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> Music Software Goto page 1, 2  Next [all]
Author Shifting from Computer Science to music - Help needed
abhirama
Hiya,

I have quit my job in love of music. Basically I am a Java programmer, but i want to get into music full time. I posess ableton suite licensed and even reaktor.

Since we cannot live without money, i wanted to shift my money making also from music somehow by contributing for maxforlive or reaktor. I am open if someone can give me some insight into this.

If i shift my money making to music, i can grow in music only. Right now since I am still earning from software programming I am not still able to give time to music production atleast to my hearts content.

Please recommend. If some one or some company wants me to do maxforlive, or reaktor ensembles, actually I have taken some tutorials on building ensembles like from kadenze and I have also taken for max for live. Need to see what will come to me. I made some ensembles in reaktor, but not maxforlive.

Actually i have already produced a song, but since i could not mix properly i am unable to produce songs myself. So it will take another 4-5 months to be a nice mixing engineer until that I also wanted to also earn from elsewhere.

Please suggest.

Thanks,
Abhirama.
rjungemann
My suggestion is a pragmatic one. I have a day job but also make music. It is possible to do both, but it requires figuring out how to keep yourself motivated. That would be my recommendation. That way you will not have to worry about being put in a bind financially. At least until you devise a plan or save a bit.

That said, there is the possibility, especially with a CS degree, to do contract work, which might free up more time to spend on music.

Check the Cycling '74 forums, there's frequently folks looking for Max/MSP related paid work, as well.

You might look into making paid M4L or Reaktor devices, paid VCV Rack plugins, or even VST/AUs.
Koekepan
Another good point:

Music is a form of art. Art is about communication. Ergo, music is a way of communicating.

To be commercially viable, it has to be able to reach people, to be something to which people can relate. The more you know about life outside of art, the better you can shape your art.

At least keeping a separate profession at a part time level is meaningfully useful.
dogoftears
Koekepan wrote:
Another good point:

Music is a form of art.


agree.

Quote:
Art is about communication.


strong disagree. how do you figure? what specific ideas are communicated by art, and how? language communicates. art does not.


Quote:
Ergo, music is a way of communicating.


strong disagree. music does not communicate. there is no specific "language" of music where a specific musical idea = a specific linguistic connotation. even lyrical pop music does not connote a specific idea-- it has different meanings, slight or large, to every single individual listener. for example, no one can tell me what my music is about. they might say something to me, like "why do you make songs about sacrificing goats?" when i never had any thought of goat sacrifice in the process of making or presenting the music. they are having a personal reaction that has nothing to do with the music and everything to do with themselves and their personal experiences/reactions. In other words, music is about how it makes you *feel*... and feeling is not a specific thing, it is different for everyone.

Quote:
To be commercially viable, it has to be able to reach people, to be something to which people can relate. The more you know about life outside of art, the better you can shape your art.


Example? what specific things can you put into music that will universally cause people to "relate" to it? If i work at starbucks, will i have a better grasp of what people want to hear? i would argue that life outside of art is mostly distractions, commercial or otherwise-- sometimes you need distractions-- a long walk in the woods, or a trip out of town, etc, and other distractions take you completely away from the path of art, such as office jobs with regular hours that leave you with little energy left to enjoy your meagre and displaced free time (leading to watching TV and getting high/drunk instead of chilling in the studio).

Quote:
At least keeping a separate profession at a part time level is meaningfully useful.


agree, for different reasons though. part time implies good hours that you can shape to prioritize your art schedule. and some degree of regular income that at least covers your overhead is good for mitigating stress, and leaving the mind free to focus on the absurd act of making music/art.
loydb
As a fellow computer nerd my advice would be -- make sure you keep doing enough computer stuff that your resume doesn't have holes in it. That way, when/if you realize that you can't survive on the $30/month you make from music, you can go back into coding without people thinking you're tainted by years of unemployment.
oberdada
The job postings I have seen that are looking for people with computer science background in music technology companies usually require high skills in C/C++, maybe matlab or assembler programming, a solid knowledge of DSP and even some interest in music. So my advice would be to begin to look up signal processing if you haven't studied that yet.
JakoGreyshire
This may help you get into the mindset of this type of movement...

It's not exactly what you are trying to do, but I think these workshops have a lot of good ideas to help you make progress with what you want to do..

http://blog.kexp.org/mastering-the-hustle/


Keep making music and open up the creative side of your brain. Look at the goal you want and see the steps in between you and your goal. Do one step at a time. Maybe building a community around you and your goal with like minded people so everyone can support each other and rise together..

Om Sri Sai Ram!

J.
Panason
dogoftears wrote:


strong disagree. how do you figure? what specific ideas are communicated by art, and how? language communicates. art does not.

...............

music does not communicate. there is no specific "language" of music where a specific musical idea = a specific linguistic connotation.


Communication is not just language. Language is in fact a small, very limited -and very limiting- subset of human communication. Language beyond utilitarian "meat and potatoes" use is often misunderstood because it is expected to have a precise meaning. This is why we have music and art, because language as a means of communication is generally tedious and flat- it fails to convey the full range of human emotion and experience.
criticalmonkey
good luck

not to state the obvious - but coding is a whole lot more creative than most working musicians get to be - and also a lot more lucrative - unless of course you get really lucky
mt3
oberdada wrote:
The job postings I have seen that are looking for people with computer science background in music technology companies usually require high skills in C/C++, maybe matlab or assembler programming, a solid knowledge of DSP and even some interest in music. So my advice would be to begin to look up signal processing if you haven't studied that yet.


Look into Juce.
Especially their amazing conference videos.
skyshaver
Huh, I'm doing the exact opposite. After years(decades) of toiling as a dj, sound tech, guitar player, drummer, bass player, private music teacher and occasionally selling music to tv, film or a dance troupe while working a variety of terrible side jobs I finally (mostly) gave up. I've gone back to university to study computer science. It's great. And it has direct musical applications. Juce is very cool. So are all the neat things you can do with embedded systems.

Anyways, good luck with your transition.
JakoGreyshire
skyshaver wrote:
Huh, I'm doing the exact opposite. After years(decades) of toiling as a dj, sound tech, guitar player, drummer, bass player, private music teacher and occasionally selling music to tv, film or a dance troupe while working a variety of terrible side jobs I finally (mostly) gave up. I've gone back to university to study computer science. It's great. And it has direct musical applications. Juce is very cool. So are all the neat things you can do with embedded systems.

Anyways, good luck with your transition.


I'm wondering how old you are going back to University? I've been thinking about doing that very thing... I'm a bit nervous about ageism in the work place though. I think there might be some grants I could get for adults going back to school... That would help...
Monotremata
abhirama wrote:
Hiya,

I have quit my job in love of music. Basically I am a Java programmer, but i want to get into music full time. I posess ableton suite licensed and even reaktor.
.....


Eeeeek. As someone who from the get go right out of high school 20+ years ago wanted to be in the music industry, let me tell ya.. Get your CS degree and do music in your off time. If the music hobby takes off GREAT! Don't count on it to EVER sustain you, even breaking in it could take years to achieve, and its going to be a long hard struggle in which you will realize that yes you NEED to have a day job of some sort to supplement it. I wasted all of that, spent all my time just doing my "Sound Production" classes and whatnot, and now Ive spent my entire career doing low end work barely keeping my head above lower class living. I got lucky for a few years, because I have been a computer geek since the Apple II days of the 80s, that I got to do a nice stint at both the Kinko's corporate office doing internal tech support and management, and then moving on to a UC school doing tech support and later network admin/management stuff. But guess what happened to both those? Kinkos original CEO ended up retiring the year I joined the company, and the replacement came right in and cut and outsourced everything. Then sold the entire company to FedEx and moved to Texas. It was no longer a locally owned Ventura, CA business. The UC system was hit hard when the CA state budget went to shit around 2008-2010, and guess who the first people to get laid off were? The department internal IT teams, and the departments all just began contracting the University's big network team to handle the work. (Thats how departments help each other, by paying for another departments services like a contractor). Yay it was Best Buy Geek Squad after that for me and continuing life of retail and customer service positions.

Get your degree, keep music you second love. You could get extremely lucky and get a break, you could never get that chance and fail miserably. Even then once you get that initial break, its very hard to sustain it for a very long time. Trust me, both you and your family will really appreciate the benefits and perks like retirement plans that come with 'normal' jobs, especially with a CS degree.

Im 42 now, and have slogged along all this time barely getting by, except for that brief period where I made good money (but was still rather broke as living in Ventura, CA is ridiculously expensive and even worse now 20 years later). Im actually considering going back to some sort of school and just learning a trade now, so I can feel useful in the world finally and hopefully find something worth sustaining myself and not having to work until I die just to feed myself. Ive already moved back in with both parents at different points in my life, and even now 3 years ago, had to come back and move in with my dad and step-mom just to have a stable roof over my head and eat every day. Its not fun man, trust me.
orbita
abhirama wrote:
Hiya,
I have quit my job in love of music. Basically I am a Java programmer, but i want to get into music full time. I posess ableton suite licensed and even reaktor.

Since we cannot live without money, i wanted to shift my money making also from music somehow by contributing for maxforlive or reaktor. I am open if someone can give me some insight into this.


If it's not too late, I would consider asking for your job back and then figure out how you are going to make it work financially before quitting.

Maybe try and make some plugins/modules in your spare time and see if they sell. If you're then able to make it work you could reduce your hours and see how it develops over time. Also music - which you may love as a hobby - may not be so much fun once you start having to do it as a job.

I'm very pleased to be an IT professional as it affords me the luxury of being able to buy and have free time to enjoy music as a hobby.
Nelson Baboon
Koekepan wrote:
Another good point:

Music is a form of art. Art is about communication. Ergo, music is a way of communicating.


Art is not about communication, and music is not a way of communicating. Sometimes it can communicate, in various ways usually peripheral to the musical content, but it is not ABOUT communication.

Quote:
To be commercially viable, it has to be able to reach people, to be something to which people can relate. The more you know about life outside of art, the better you can shape your art.


I'd guess that more people make music that doesn't reach people, and that they don't relate to very much, other than buying products that are being advertised, or suffering through some lame television or movie.

When one makes music as art, one is generally not communicating - one is simply making music. How much one knows about this or that makes little difference.

Quote:
At least keeping a separate profession at a part time level is meaningfully useful.


"meaningfully useful"?
Nelson Baboon
Panason wrote:
dogoftears wrote:


strong disagree. how do you figure? what specific ideas are communicated by art, and how? language communicates. art does not.

...............

music does not communicate. there is no specific "language" of music where a specific musical idea = a specific linguistic connotation.


Communication is not just language. Language is in fact a small, very limited -and very limiting- subset of human communication. Language beyond utilitarian "meat and potatoes" use is often misunderstood because it is expected to have a precise meaning. This is why we have music and art, because language as a means of communication is generally tedious and flat- it fails to convey the full range of human emotion and experience.


Can you communicate an idea that cannot be expressed in language? The question doesn't even really make sense. And the notion that music/art exist BECAUSE one cannot communicate certain things in one's mind is simply ridiculous. Music and art are primal to the human condition, and didn't come about secondarily, after language, because people were frustrated with language.

People think that one is being 'mean' to music by saying that it isn't essentially communication. Music is grand, but it is doing something else, generally, except for the fools who write music for bad movies that 'means' that this is sad and you should cry. It can be evocative, and you might cry, or you might listen intently, or you might projectile vomit. It doesn't function like communication.
Nelson Baboon
i have to laugh at people who arrogantly (I think) ask questions like this. You want to make money doing meaningful stuff in music, having very little experience at doing practical things in music, while so, so many people have never been able to make a living at music, many of them extremely talented. My impression is that it's much easier to totally sell out and make some money at it, but even that, I'd imagine is not easy.

Keep your straight job. Try easing into a music career gradually, unless you have enough $$$ to go years without making money, enhancing your education, etc.
mt3
you kids get off my lawn
JohnLRice
Yes, art can be form of communication and any one who disagrees either hasn't thought about it hard enough or is just fucking stupid.
Nelson Baboon
JohnLRice wrote:
Yes, art can be form of communication and any one who disagrees either hasn't thought about it hard enough or is just fucking stupid.


maybe both, punk.
JohnLRice
Nelson Baboon wrote:
JohnLRice wrote:
Yes, art can be form of communication and any one who disagrees either hasn't thought about it hard enough or is just fucking stupid.


maybe both, punk.
hihi I'm also open to the possibility that I haven't thought about it enough and that I'm fucking stupid too. Actually, I can site many occasions where both are true . . . Dead Banana
Nelson Baboon
JohnLRice wrote:
Nelson Baboon wrote:
JohnLRice wrote:
Yes, art can be form of communication and any one who disagrees either hasn't thought about it hard enough or is just fucking stupid.


maybe both, punk.
hihi I'm also open to the possibility that I haven't thought about it enough and that I'm fucking stupid too. Actually, I can site many occasions where both are true . . . Dead Banana


yeah, john, it's not like we're saying that music doesn't affect us, but just that if you really thought about what we mean by 'communication', that word really isn't what is going on.
JohnLRice
Nelson Baboon wrote:
JohnLRice wrote:
Nelson Baboon wrote:
JohnLRice wrote:
Yes, art can be form of communication and any one who disagrees either hasn't thought about it hard enough or is just fucking stupid.


maybe both, punk.
hihi I'm also open to the possibility that I haven't thought about it enough and that I'm fucking stupid too. Actually, I can site many occasions where both are true . . . Dead Banana


yeah, john, it's not like we're saying that music doesn't affect us, but just that if you really thought about what we mean by 'communication', that word really isn't what is going on.
At the risk of continuing to derail the OP's thread:

From https://www.quora.com/Is-art-a-form-of-communication
Carl Stieger, Artist, Thinker
Yes, art is a form of communication. What separates it from other forms of communication is that the information comes from a subjective source, and is then interpreted in a subjective way by the viewer (or listener, or reader, or whatever form of art you're talking about). What differentiates a painting of someone from a snapshot of them is that the snapshot is only trying to convey the objective information of what it captures. A piece of art on the other hand can include all manner of subjective information, either formally through manipulation of color, light, composition and what have you, or conceptually through juxtaposition, reference, abstraction or other forms of visual manipulation. You can even choose to use a snapshot artistically if you know how to infuse it with subjective meaning, but take that away and it is just an ordinary snapshot again.

The same goes for the difference between a written passage such as this, which is an objective series of words, and a piece of literature or a poem which can use all manner of methods to add additional meaning to the words, that while still only words serve to enlighten in an entirely new and wholy subjective way. The only problem that you run into sometimes is when the reader (or viewer, or listener, or what have you) interprets things in a different way than was originally intended. Other times the intended meaning (if there is one) is so vague that people will not immediately know what they're supposed to get from it, leading them to think that those who claim to "get" the meaning are simply imagining something or making it up. But no form of communication is entirely efficient, and the subjective nature of art is the very thing that gives it its meaning and importance to us.

(more discussion at the link above)
Nelson Baboon
JohnLRice wrote:
Nelson Baboon wrote:
JohnLRice wrote:
Nelson Baboon wrote:
JohnLRice wrote:
Yes, art can be form of communication and any one who disagrees either hasn't thought about it hard enough or is just fucking stupid.


maybe both, punk.
hihi I'm also open to the possibility that I haven't thought about it enough and that I'm fucking stupid too. Actually, I can site many occasions where both are true . . . Dead Banana


yeah, john, it's not like we're saying that music doesn't affect us, but just that if you really thought about what we mean by 'communication', that word really isn't what is going on.
At the risk of continuing to derail the OP's thread:

From https://www.quora.com/Is-art-a-form-of-communication
Carl Stieger, Artist, Thinker
Yes, art is a form of communication. What separates it from other forms of communication is that the information comes from a subjective source, and is then interpreted in a subjective way by the viewer (or listener, or reader, or whatever form of art you're talking about). What differentiates a painting of someone from a snapshot of them is that the snapshot is only trying to convey the objective information of what it captures. A piece of art on the other hand can include all manner of subjective information, either formally through manipulation of color, light, composition and what have you, or conceptually through juxtaposition, reference, abstraction or other forms of visual manipulation. You can even choose to use a snapshot artistically if you know how to infuse it with subjective meaning, but take that away and it is just an ordinary snapshot again.

The same goes for the difference between a written passage such as this, which is an objective series of words, and a piece of literature or a poem which can use all manner of methods to add additional meaning to the words, that while still only words serve to enlighten in an entirely new and wholy subjective way. The only problem that you run into sometimes is when the reader (or viewer, or listener, or what have you) interprets things in a different way than was originally intended. Other times the intended meaning (if there is one) is so vague that people will not immediately know what they're supposed to get from it, leading them to think that those who claim to "get" the meaning are simply imagining something or making it up. But no form of communication is entirely efficient, and the subjective nature of art is the very thing that gives it its meaning and importance to us.

(more discussion at the link above)


i read some of this, and it doesn't make much sense. You can't convince me of something by simply stating that someone is a 'thinker'.
JohnLRice
Nelson Baboon wrote:
JohnLRice wrote:
Nelson Baboon wrote:
JohnLRice wrote:
Nelson Baboon wrote:
JohnLRice wrote:
Yes, art can be form of communication and any one who disagrees either hasn't thought about it hard enough or is just fucking stupid.


maybe both, punk.
hihi I'm also open to the possibility that I haven't thought about it enough and that I'm fucking stupid too. Actually, I can site many occasions where both are true . . . Dead Banana


yeah, john, it's not like we're saying that music doesn't affect us, but just that if you really thought about what we mean by 'communication', that word really isn't what is going on.
At the risk of continuing to derail the OP's thread:

From https://www.quora.com/Is-art-a-form-of-communication
Carl Stieger, Artist, Thinker
Yes, art is a form of communication. What separates it from other forms of communication is that the information comes from a subjective source, and is then interpreted in a subjective way by the viewer (or listener, or reader, or whatever form of art you're talking about). What differentiates a painting of someone from a snapshot of them is that the snapshot is only trying to convey the objective information of what it captures. A piece of art on the other hand can include all manner of subjective information, either formally through manipulation of color, light, composition and what have you, or conceptually through juxtaposition, reference, abstraction or other forms of visual manipulation. You can even choose to use a snapshot artistically if you know how to infuse it with subjective meaning, but take that away and it is just an ordinary snapshot again.

The same goes for the difference between a written passage such as this, which is an objective series of words, and a piece of literature or a poem which can use all manner of methods to add additional meaning to the words, that while still only words serve to enlighten in an entirely new and wholy subjective way. The only problem that you run into sometimes is when the reader (or viewer, or listener, or what have you) interprets things in a different way than was originally intended. Other times the intended meaning (if there is one) is so vague that people will not immediately know what they're supposed to get from it, leading them to think that those who claim to "get" the meaning are simply imagining something or making it up. But no form of communication is entirely efficient, and the subjective nature of art is the very thing that gives it its meaning and importance to us.

(more discussion at the link above)


i read some of this, and it doesn't make much sense. You can't convince me of something by simply stating that someone is a 'thinker'.
heh, that was just his signature, he may be a 'stinker' for all I know. hihi But I agree with his thoughts as they make sense to me.
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> Music Software Goto page 1, 2  Next [all]
Page 1 of 2
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group