Home Studios Are Killing Music

[Panic]

Home Studios Are Killing Music
Ronan Chris Murphy

I get asked a lot by songwriters what gear they should buy, and I tell them a 4-track cassette or an old ADAT with a Mackie 1202 — and whatever they do, don't get a DAW. I am obviously a terrible businessman because I have a business, Home Recording Boot Camp, that makes money from teaching musicians how to make better recordings at home. But I have seen home studios wreck a lot of people's careers. For the most part, if you are a performing songwriter that puts a fancy studio in your home, if that does not stop your career dead in its tracks you are the exception and not the rule. I used to see it in artists all the time and then it dawned on me, that I can trace the end of my career as a performing songwriter to exactly the time I started building my home studio back in the late '80's. Granted, I have been lucky and traded it for a cool career as a producer/engineer and I am honestly much better at that than being a performer — but it sure as hell ended things for me.

Read the rest here: http://www.prostudioreviews.com/home...ing-music.html

I'm not a performing singer-songwriter, but I thought this was spot on in that my writing suffered in the last decade(+), that I've had a DAW based studio. It wasn't until recently that things started to pick up again and I attribute that, in large part, to the fact that the home studio has been dormant (for the most part) while I focus on writing for an upcoming release. Not only has the quantity of material increased dramatically, but so has the quality. For the first time in, I don't know how long, I actually like what I'm coming up with.

Anyway, just wanted to throw this out there for discussion.

[Jae.Thomas]

if you can't deal with the technology, you end up blaming it.

if you don't have the wherewithal to understand the type of tool you have in front of you, you will accuse it.

have some self control, get busy, learn a workflow. It's all the same thing, and im sure back in the day people were saying similar things about tape.

My productivity has been on an increase, first since having digital recording, second from breaking the shackles of religion. But then again, I was only recording on karaoke machines before then. Digital has been the best thing that has happened to me.

[msore]

Use tools for what they are good for.
Don't use tools to do what you cannot do.

[karbomusic]

if you can't deal with the technology, you end up blaming it.

Yet each comes its being in less functional situations where one is forced to accomplish A or B with less than ideal resources. So it works both ways (not that you disagree, I dunno), the new ways will never completely replace the old ways because both carry advantages the other does not. Doing more with less, mentally and its byproduct is a very real and worthwhile phenonmena. Its simply another part of the puzzle that shouldn't be forgotten.

I don't necessarily agree with the article's reasons, I'm more inclined to expect that option overkill affects us in ways that go beyond simple lack of self control. Not that self control isn't good, just sayin.

[karbomusic]

if you can't deal with the technology, you end up blaming it.

Yet each comes with its own advantages/disadvantages.. As in being in less functional situations where one is forced to accomplish A or B with less than ideal resources. So it works both ways (not that you disagree, I dunno), the new ways will never completely replace the old ways because both carry advantages the other does not. Doing more with less, mentally and its byproduct is a very real and worthwhile phenonmena.

I don't necessarily agree with the article's reasons, I'm more inclined to expect that option overkill affects us in ways that go beyond simple lack of self control. Not that self control isn't good, just sayin.

[Nip]

Everything takes form with a guitar and a piece of paper first for me. Chord progressions, structure of song, some lyrics.

Then when starting to record in a daw you end up adding a break or change key etc because listening to the full part make you realize if it's boring and what is needed more.

But if you start up with a daw you might be in for concentrating on the wrong stuff like which synth sound to use etc.

The musical part must really come before anything else. You can do that on a daw as well, if you concentrate on that part - not so much which sounds you should use etc. Arrangement comes later.

[PAPT]

So, some people get sidetracked trying to make the perfect studio and trying to get pro results in that studio.

There is nothing stopping a person from treating a DAW as a simple tool for sketching out ideas.
It can be used in the same manner as a 4 track tape, but has more flexibility.
If you don't get carried away a DAW is a better tool even for sketching out ideas than a 4 track tape.

The guy who wrote the article fell into a hole and wants to blame the DAW.

If you already have a computer you can spend $60 on Reaper, get a simple low priced mic, maybe a little mixer if you want to make quick tapes of your band and you are on your way.

Or you can go the overkill route, or try to do a whole pro type of studio deal.
It's just a bunch of options.

It's tiresome hearing people who fell into a whole of their own making telling people to go entirely in the opposite direction.

[run, megalodon]

Originally Posted by Jason Brian Merrill

if you can't deal with the technology, you end up blaming it.

Well I think the point of this article is to point out to people that they may not be able to "deal with it" and they just haven't yet realized they'd be better off doing it a different way. I, too, wouldn't want to go to someone else to record, and it is true that you need to learn how to work the daw into your way of doing things, but I don't doubt that for a lot of people the very time consuming, complex, and expensive undertaking of learning how to record themselves is wasted effort.

Originally Posted by msore

Use tools for what they are good for.
Don't use tools to do what you cannot do.

This is very vague. You could be agreeing or disagreeing with Ronan here.

[run, megalodon]

Originally Posted by PAPT

The guy who wrote the article fell into a hole and wants to blame the DAW.

Ronan Chris Murphy is a very successful guy from what I can tell and even spends a lot of time trying to spread his expertise these day, so I don't think that's fair to say.

http://ronansrecordingshow.com/
http://www.venetowest.com/rcm/

[Panic]

I think the point he was trying to make is that; the time spent on the home studio/production learning curve could be better spent doing what the singer-songwriter does best: writing and performing.

[Jae.Thomas]

Originally Posted by aste

I think the point he was trying to make is that; the time spent on the home studio/production learning curve could be better spent doing what the singer-songwriter does best: writing and performing.

studio owners would sure make more money...

[Bristol Posse]

I had exactly the opposite experience to what was written in the OP

Prior to the DAW I was a guy with a few ideas and an occasional guitar habit.

once I got my hands on a DAW everything fell into place, I finished writing a whole bunch of songs and recorded them and I now play out live every couple of weeks, which is something I hadn't done in the twenty years since I left college

Admittedly I do like simplicity, and within my DAW I only have a couple of compressors, a reverb and a channel strip and a couple of outboard pieces and don't waste any time chasing magic plug in bullets. DAW process comes once songs are written, rehearsed and performed several times

Everyone's experience is different I guess

[ivansc]

instrument and piece pf paper guy initially.
But once I have the basic *Idea* it is down to putting down a basic bass and drums or guitar and drums and that means DAW.

It took me while to gt used to the idea that I should write songs sitting on a stool with a guitar and notebook or a keyboard and notebook, but once I had my workflow divided into two separate streams, the only thing that distracts me now are FORUMS! (grin)

[Cosmic]

My career only really started taking off the day I installed REAPER!

Yer man is full of it.

Whats the old saying..People who can..Do..People who cant..teach.

But there is merit in the old working with limitations model..it breeds inventiveness.

[Lawrence]

See the latest "Dan Rather Reports". They had a round table discussion about the industry and home studios were part of the discussion. Good episode.

Anyway, I don't think home studios are killing music at all. Home studios and the net and digital toys just let us hear all the subjectively bad music out there made by people who aren't actually musicians. The best records are still mostly made the old fashioned way and places like Nashville are chock full of players who don't use samples and sequencers.

Would a random 12 year old guitarist be better served by a simple recording setup, not chasing recording tech and just practicing more instead of trying to make "records" for the net? Probably.

[James HE]

Originally Posted by Cosmic

My career only really started taking off the day I installed REAPER!

Yer man is full of it.

Whats the old saying..People who can..Do..People who cant..teach.

But there is merit in the old working with limitations model..it breeds inventiveness.

It's not so much about limitations, it's more about comfortable hats.
From a songwriting point of view.

My output with a 4 track - 1992 - 2002 ~120 songs

My output with a DAW 2002 -2012 12 songs



Of course other life factors should be considered. When I was younger, I had more time to just write. Spent probably 5 hours a day with a guitar in my hand.

[Cosmic]

Originally Posted by James HE

It's not so much about limitations, it's more about comfortable hats.
From a songwriting point of view.

My output with a 4 track - 1992 - 2002 ~120 songs

My output with a DAW 2002 -2012 12 songs



Of course other life factors should be considered. When I was younger, I had more time to just write. Spent probably 5 hours a day with a guitar in my hand.

In the 5000 hours I've used reaper over the 22 months I've had it I've recorded 100 songs!

Output in previous 17 years...20

[Lawrence]

Originally Posted by James HE

My output with a 4 track - 1992 - 2002 ~120 songs

My output with a DAW 2002 -2012 12 songs

Haha.

At least a small part of that is because a 4 track makes you commit, you have no choice if you want to keep overdubbing. DAW's allow endless tweaking and mixing and so forth and many don't commit, they tweak a song forever, with instruments and tons of plugs running live into perpetuity.

Anyway, I'm not a songwriter but the question I'd ask is not "how many songs" but which groups of songs are better songs... not better mixes, better songs.

[Jae.Thomas]

I have archived nearly every single idea i've ever recorded.

on tape (1995-2000): 267

digitally, on a crappy PC in 2000: 24

from 2001-2006 on a better PC but was full time into religion: 500

from 2007-now, on better PCs and without religion: 1700 (this does not include revisions - old revisions are put into a zip file and therefore would only count as ONE extra)

also, from 2007-2009 I recorded almost 100 covers... that's not included

im sure they are all masterpieces but...

[Cosmic]

The more I learn about production the less time I spend producing.
I'm developing a mental checklist...and once all the boxes are ticked I wrap her up.

[duffman]

I understand Mr. Murphy's point.
"Do what you do. Only do what you do, and do it well."
Yes I can see that.

But what he does not state is as a songwritter with a DAW......I can now get a full-blown finshed production the way I hear it in my head without having to wait on some bass player to show up. Or for the horn section to come back from a "smoke" break.

The expense of setting up my DAW was a one time thing, not some on-going hourly rate paid to some studio. I get to explore ideas and sounds at no added cost.

I have the opportunity to use my "home studio" to make $$$ is I so choose. Over the past 18 months I have been lucky enough to do a little, and I mean very little, recording & editing of voice overs for some instructional videos.

The amount of songs I write, record, collaborate on in any given time frame is only hindered by the amount of time I have to spend doing so. Without a DAW I highly doubt I would do much at all in the way of writting.

Duff

[lboorse2]

If the song ain't in your head, no DAW or home studio, no matter how simple or complex, is going to help that.

[Sound asleep]

being a good producer takes a lot of time. recording full tracks takes a lot of time. writing and practicing and performing, takes a lot of time.

i could see how the home studio could stop people from performing, and i had to stop working so much on recording my stuff.

now, i will only record more basic stuff, some guitars and some vocals. that way it can go more quickly, and i can focus on more songs, and performing them.

but i will always have a home studio, and i will always want a bigger and better one until i have something awesome.

you could spend a lot of time learning the ins and outs of recording.

i think home recording studios are not necessarily the cause either, but just a natural migration for music enthusiasts, that have not blown up in the performance world, and still love to make music.

so maybe nto necessarily a cause but a correlation.

i think many of the very successful artists, have their own home studios.

[Cosmic]

Thinking about this..I suppose..I had 20 years of practicing to learn my craft befor I ever started recording at home.Would I have practiced less if I had a DAW?No idea.

[Nip]

Originally Posted by James HE

It's not so much about limitations, it's more about comfortable hats.
From a songwriting point of view.

My output with a 4 track - 1992 - 2002 ~120 songs

My output with a DAW 2002 -2012 12 songs



Of course other life factors should be considered. When I was younger, I had more time to just write. Spent probably 5 hours a day with a guitar in my hand.

I felt very restricted in the 80's when I first ran real2real tape and soundonsound, then Fostex 4-track casette porta, then a Tascam 4 track casette porta.

Then doing one track sync track and ran sequencer on commodore in sync and an external mixer did as much as possible. Then the same with an Atari.

The amount of planning to reduce bouncing tracks it took really took much of the joy away.

But I longed to have the money to get a Fostex 16-track real2real tape machine - but could not afford it. So I lost interest not being able to make it sound close to professional.

What you can do today with a daw is nothing less than amazing. It's really about the work put in - and that is what you get.

So to cherish the times of the good old portastudio - no, that is not the case.

Hope is back.

[Quasar]

Interesting read! I think the analysis falls short in a couple of ways:

1) The observation that many or most home studios will fail to result in the creation of great music is no doubt true, but this doesn't imply cause and effect. Rather, it would be a natural consequence of any technological innovation that takes something (very high quality audio recording) that was once accessible to a relative few and makes it universally available. It removes a potential barrier for the creative artist, but it also seriously dilutes the talent pool when trying to assess whether home studios are valuable for musicians. If you took the medical tools currently available in cancer research labs and made cheap, prosumer versions for the "home researcher", it's doubtful that the War Against Cancer would become exponentially more successful. But it doesn't mean that any individual amateur home scientist couldn't discover something valuable. The tools do not in themselves inhibit that.

2) The assertion that artists are in danger of dissipating their creative juices because of the temptation to trip on computers and DAW tech is also true, but artists have always had a gazillion potential distractions that can sap one's time and energy. Whether it's family responsibilities or money or political activism or TV or Facebook or drug addiction or chronic back pain, the net effect is the same since there's only so many hours in a day. DAW tech is just another one of those potential distractions. It always has been and remains incumbent upon the artist to manage his time and resources in such a way as will provide a creative space in which to work. DAWs haven't made this aspect any easier. Any notion that these tools can somehow provide a "shortcut" to creative excellence is illusory. But they haven't made it any harder, either.

[msore]

If many, many more people do something (x),
and most of those people don't do it as well as they could,
that does not detract from the value of x.

For example, many many people go to school, or college.
Some do well and learn amazing things.
Most get by and learn very little.
That does not mean education is not valuable,
and it certainly does not mean that education is MAKING
people do poorly in it.

Similarly with DAWs.
More people using them will mean
more people doing not excellent stuff with them.

However, the GREAT stuff done with DAWs
is not going to necessarily show up
on the top forty.
It may be great, and not "show up" at all on anyone's media radar.

[Sound asleep]

Originally Posted by Nip

Everything takes form with a guitar and a piece of paper first for me. Chord progressions, structure of song, some lyrics.

Then when starting to record in a daw you end up adding a break or change key etc because listening to the full part make you realize if it's boring and what is needed more.

But if you start up with a daw you might be in for concentrating on the wrong stuff like which synth sound to use etc.

The musical part must really come before anything else. You can do that on a daw as well, if you concentrate on that part - not so much which sounds you should use etc. Arrangement comes later.

i never start with paper. it's either an instrument, or if in a DAW, it's a beat.

i find choosing sounds very important, i don't find it's the wrong thing to concentrate on. the sounds inspire the content for me. so i browse quickly through sounds, find one that speaks to me, and write something for it.

if i have already written the song, it's a little different. it's more i start by recording the isntrument i wrote it on, then the beat, and then the vocals, and then whatever other instrument or sound i want to hear, which usually is never a digital one really.

[Sound asleep]

Originally Posted by Quasar

Interesting read! I think the analysis falls short in a couple of ways:

1) The observation that many or most home studios will fail to result in the creation of great music is no doubt true, but this doesn't imply cause and effect. Rather, it would be a natural consequence of any technological innovation that takes something (very high quality audio recording) that was once accessible to a relative few and makes it universally available. It removes a potential barrier for the creative artist, but it also seriously dilutes the talent pool when trying to assess whether home studios are valuable for musicians. If you took the medical tools currently available in cancer research labs and made cheap, prosumer versions for the "home researcher", it's doubtful that the War Against Cancer would become exponentially more successful. But it doesn't mean that any individual amateur home scientist couldn't discover something valuable. The tools do not in themselves inhibit that.

2) The assertion that artists are in danger of dissipating their creative juices because of the temptation to trip on computers and DAW tech is also true, but artists have always had a gazillion potential distractions that can sap one's time and energy. Whether it's family responsibilities or money or political activism or TV or Facebook or drug addiction or chronic back pain, the net effect is the same since there's only so many hours in a day. DAW tech is just another one of those potential distractions. It always has been and remains incumbent upon the artist to manage his time and resources in such a way as will provide a creative space in which to work. DAWs haven't made this aspect any easier. Any notion that these tools can somehow provide a "shortcut" to creative excellence is illusory. But they haven't made it any harder, either.

right, but usually, a recording artist, writes and performs, and then, when is producing a record, just pops in and records some stuff, and then some other person does the full time job of mixing it, and then some other person does the full time job of mastering it.

in a home studio, if you are doing these things, you've taken on another 2 full time jobs.

and this is stuff you need to make music, it is part of the musical process, not some other distraction that your music could do without.

[Sound asleep]

Originally Posted by msore

However, the GREAT stuff done with DAWs
is not going to necessarily show up
on the top forty.
It may be great, and not "show up" at all on anyone's media radar.

exactly. case and point, all of MY music.

i think the point though, is not how good recordings are. it's more that when one gets a home recording studio, one records in their home, and does not perform and get exposure. which is valid i think to some degree. i mean, there is a lot to learn with recording. if all you do is concentrate on performing and writing, then you have more time to spend on that. if you are also recording, you diverted some time to recording and learning how to mix, that could have otherwise been spent on being a performer.

but, like i said, i think that home recording studios might also be where performers end up that didn't do so hot performing. so it may just be a correlation rather than a cause.

i think it goes without saying that with every tool in existence, some obtain great results, and some poor ones, and it has not to do with how great the tools are that much, but more with how great the person using them is.

you could go back real far in history and people with much worse tools did still very great things.

recording was only possible more recently, and the quality has increased. what people can do has changed, but great music has always existed, and recordings of great music have always existed as well.

now, we have great tools available for everyone, but buying the same golf club as tiger woods, won't make you play golf as well as he plays.

tools are enablers, not the greatness itself.

i find i get that alot with instruments people think "can you teach me guitar?" well. guitar is not a thing that you learn like math is a thing that you learn.

there are things you can learn, but the sky is the limit, you can learn and improve forever. but music is not the guitar, music is not something you learn.

a guitar is just a path that allows music to exit your body. the music must be within you, and you can use a guitar to set it free.

but, people can be taught to play chord shapes and learn guitar like campfire tunes style. that can be done. but that is different. and still, for some harder than others.

you know what i mean? it's like people think that anyone can learn guitar like learning to ride a bike. but it's more like anyone can learn to read and write, but writing hit novels is a whole other story.

[Panic]

This is probably a contradiction, but some of the more interesting stuff I've come up with lately has been started using Propellerheads FIGURE on my iPhone.

[Sound asleep]

Originally Posted by aste

This is probably a contradiction, but some of the more interesting stuff I've come up with lately has been started using Propellerheads FIGURE on my iPhone.

i don't know how you can stand making music on a phone.

but i think sometimes for the creative process, being limited helps. you have limited features and limited sounds, and you work with those to make something. i find that is often very helpful. if there are too many options and too many sounds, it can be kind of overwhelming. if you have less you make do with what you got, and what you got helps give you defined direction.

the problem with that, is that rather quickly, you feel as though you've depleted the resource, and you want more.

it might be cool if you could download sort of sound packs. not like all massive sounds, or all drumkit sounds, but a set of sounds for all sorts of instruments, and then you go nuts starting with that as a base.

sometimes too much choice hurts, but whenever you want something and don't have it, that's not good at all.

[naturalbridge]

I started out on a 4-track. Now, I’m moving up to REAPER + RME Fireface UFX + a few nice mics. Gonna point them at my things that make sounds, and play. I’m excited to finally have some nice gear to record with, and I don’t relate to this guys plight at all, although I understand it.

[Cosmic]

I'm about to murder some more music in my home studio

[naturalbridge]

Originally Posted by Cosmic

I'm about to murder some more music in my home studio

^(^_^)>

[Panic]

Originally Posted by Sound asleep

i don't know how you can stand making music on a phone.

but i think sometimes for the creative process, being limited helps. you have limited features and limited sounds, and you work with those to make something. i find that is often very helpful. if there are too many options and too many sounds, it can be kind of overwhelming. if you have less you make do with what you got, and what you got helps give you defined direction.

the problem with that, is that rather quickly, you feel as though you've depleted the resource, and you want more.

it might be cool if you could download sort of sound packs. not like all massive sounds, or all drumkit sounds, but a set of sounds for all sorts of instruments, and then you go nuts starting with that as a base.

sometimes too much choice hurts, but whenever you want something and don't have it, that's not good at all.

The phone is a little small to be working on, but the app is really well thought out, so it's pretty simple to work with, even on the small screen.

It's limited, but in a lot of ways it's perfect for working on ideas. It gives you drums, bass and lead; so, you have rhythm, and 2 voice counterpoint. This is pretty much how I work on ideas anyway; playing with just a melody and a counter-melody.

Anyway, part of the fun of it is finding ways to make it fresh and interesting again once you've dug into a rut, or run up against the wall.

[ngarjuna]

The concept of the home studio is not really new. Quite a few musicians have had variations of multitrack recorders going way back now. So I would say this situation lacks uniqueness perhaps.

Of the author's two main reasons, I agree with number 1, studios do tend to generate momentum and suck in time, resources and interest. I'm not so sure about number 2. I guess the way I look at it is that it takes a long while to actually get to the level of knowledge and experience where you can successfully engineer; that's a pretty major investment of time and money that, as someone said upthread, could be devoted instead to the musical mission itself. Being a great musician is fairly time consuming too and also doesn't just happen overnight. So the ideal of mastering both is frankly unrealistic for many people unless you're talking about a fairly long term plan.

[Jedi]

All I can say is until I had my first home studio (early 90s),
I never really finished writing any songs. I find the process
of recording a song, and playing it back over and over, helps
me refine and embellish in ways I'd never do just playing a
solo guitar and singing.

Were it not for my studios over the years, I'd likely never
have written some of my very best songs.

I should add that I've not performed in a band since the 70s.
I'm strictly a "one man band" and never play live at all.

Jedi

[Sound asleep]

Originally Posted by Jedi

All I can say is until I had my first home studio (early 90s),
I never really finished writing any songs. I find the process
of recording a song, and playing it back over and over, helps
me refine and embellish in ways I'd never do just playing a
solo guitar and singing.

Were it not for my studios over the years, I'd likely never
have written some of my very best songs.

I should add that I've not performed in a band since the 70s.
I'm strictly a "one man band" and never play live at all.

Jedi

ya, me too i am a one man band, and i agree, recording tracks does get me to make them nice and finished and complete.

I also will record stuff in a rough draft kind of way, so that i can listen to it, and learn my lyrics.

[run, megalodon]

Originally Posted by ngarjuna

The concept of the home studio is not really new. Quite a few musicians have had variations of multitrack recorders going way back now. So I would say this situation lacks uniqueness perhaps.

The idea that that's way to do things is sort of a new idea. In the past, a home studio was complex and so costly that you had to have some real money and even so couldn't really hope to afford all the gear needed to rival a professional studio, and there was a general understanding that recording was a job for professionals just stemming from the fact that all recording was done at major studios.

So people that had home studios were more likely to have some experience writing music and being out in a music scene, and possibly recording in a professional studio, and they were more likely to have reduced expectations for their studio.

Now a lot of people just starting out simply think, "Why should I go to a studio when I can do it myself?" And then they slog headlong into stuff like trying to get decent monitors for $500, sussing out acoustics issues, getting vocals to sound "warm," trying to record drums in a 10X10 room, and so on.

And when it comes to the music, the computer becomes a crutch and takes the place of learning your craft. You don't have to learn rhythm when you can just correct everything. You also don't have to learn how to sing when you have autotune and melodyne. The problem with that is that these skills amount to more than just being able to record without editing; it's evolving this stuff that makes you able to make better music. You develop a sense of groove, your musical ear, and your musical personality. You don't sit down with an instrument and concentrate on what is actually important; the notes, the flow of the song, the arrangement. You don't move towards that place where you have enough proficiency to speak through your music. You just come up with a cool riff and then run to your computer and think, "I'll try that awesome new modeled delay, and maybe some extra saturation to really make that pop," (even though you can't really hear the saturation) and "what massive bass patch is going to work with this." And then you are just sitting in front of the glowing screen, listening to the same 8 bars over and over again until you've heard it so many times it's meaningless to you, just like saying a word too many times, pushing faders around, adding plugins, copying and pasting, and rearranging until you get tired enough to leave it there. Then you come back the next day and hear it fresh and maybe adding something cool, then sink into the same state.

But don't get me wrong, I love the home recording revolution, and that doesn't happen to everyone of course, it is a kind of inverse ideal of how bad things could be, and it will all happen less and less as the "industry" matures and more information and a more productive discussion thrives online. There are new instructional videos popping up on youtube everyday, plenty of pros are getting in on that, and there are more and more people who are talking from whom newbies can learn what it is they should expect, what they need to learn, and where they need to concentrate their efforts and funds. People are learning how to make it work. And I expect that we will get to hear a lot of great music from now on that would never have seen the light of day before. There is the idea that we aren't really gaining anything because anyone who is really good enough could get picked up by a label, but I think that that doesn't take into account that artists need to be grown, and one can get alot of experience from recording themselves and releasing their own album that they couldn't get otherwise, and the fact that music is a cultural discussion and everyone influences everyone else, and when everyone can speak freely I think it will be easier for sounds to grow.