Dubstepforum.com

I feel like when I smoke and produce it inspires creativity but at the same time your efficiency is killed by being sidetracked on a sound or fucking with a synth.

I produce better with weed because I concentrate too hard all the time, which means some fairly gnarly headaches on a bad day, so weed helps with the headaches, and I find it easier to do things quickly with a shorter attention span. Then again, when I blaze I get two things going through my head, and one of them is how comfortable my new chair is. I just don't have a computer with internet or games to distract me. I'll eventually make some beats, whether I remember it or not.

I get way to distracted if I smoke so I choose not to.

I've been smoking about as long as i've been producing and find these days that being baked is only really any good for mixdowns. I fine things that are a tiny bit too high in the mix or any bass that gets woofy becomes a lot more noticeable and I can really get shit sounding clean a lot faster but as far as actually making new loops and so on I work a lot better in the morning after a huge coffee.

I used to take a lot of other drugs and do the majority of track writing when coming down. After I stopped taking drugs it took me several years to get back into writing. Beware of the dependency

Weed doesn't boost creativity it reduces your ability to discern between what sounds good and what sounds bad... There's a big difference.

Weed is a terrible drug. Why anybody would do weed when there's such a vast range of drugs that don't suck dick is beyond me...

kaiori breathe wrote:Weed doesn't boost creativity

for you.

pete bubonic wrote:

kaiori breathe wrote:Weed doesn't boost creativity

for you.

Here are just some of the effects weed has:

Impairment of MEMORY, CONCENTRATION and motor coordination. Using weed will trigger a dopamine release; in the frontal lobe (integral to your being creative) dopamine usually controls the flow of information to other parts of the brain, a dopamine disorder, i.e., too much or too little dopamine, in this region, causes a decline in the effectiveness of functions such as memory, attention, and PROBLEM-SOLVING.

I find it difficult to understand the argument that a drug which impairs concentration, memory and problem solving (three vital facets of creativity) could be improving your creativity. It seems like an oxymoron to me.

I used to do weed, and I used to write music on it, I thought it was making me more creative, in retrospect all it was doing was making me less discerning and there is a very big difference between the two and I think a lot of people who smoke weed to increase creativity haven't thought about which is actually happening, and equally, for a lot of people doing weed, they've heard the story that it increases creativity before doing it and as such it does via placebo when they eventually do it.

I'm not going to finish this post by sitting on the fence and saying "I'm sure weed does increase creativity for some people" because to be honest, that's not something I am sure of, as, for me it didn't, the science of what's going on in your head says it doesn't and I've never once seen a single real life example of person who was more creative on weed, just people who were less discerning (which on the face of it can look like creativity sometimes), or people who told themselves they were and thus became it via self fulfilling prophesy and placebo.

Anyway, I'm not trying to assert my being right or your being wrong and I'm not trying to be aggressively anti-drugs or threaten the way anybody does their thing, just clarifying what I said so it seems like less of a blanket statement.

kaiori breathe wrote:

pete bubonic wrote:

kaiori breathe wrote:Weed doesn't boost creativity

for you.

Here are just some of the effects weed has:

Impairment of MEMORY, CONCENTRATION and motor coordination. Using weed will trigger a dopamine release; in the frontal lobe (integral to your being creative) dopamine usually controls the flow of information to other parts of the brain, a dopamine disorder, i.e., too much or too little dopamine, in this region, causes a decline in the effectiveness of functions such as memory, attention, and PROBLEM-SOLVING.

I find it difficult to understand the argument that a drug which impairs concentration, memory and problem solving (three vital facets of creativity) could be improving your creativity. It seems like an oxymoron to me.

I used to do weed, and I used to write music on it, I thought it was making me more creative, in retrospect all it was doing was making me less discerning and there is a very big difference between the two and I think a lot of people who smoke weed to increase creativity haven't thought about which is actually happening, and equally, for a lot of people doing weed, they've heard the story that it increases creativity before doing it and as such it does via placebo when they eventually do it.

I'm not going to finish this post by sitting on the fence and saying "I'm sure weed does increase creativity for some people" because to be honest, that's not something I am sure of, as, for me it didn't, the science of what's going on in your head says it doesn't and I've never once seen a single real life example of person who was more creative on weed, just people who were less discerning (which on the face of it can look like creativity sometimes), or people who told themselves they were and thus became it via self fulfilling prophesy and placebo.

Anyway, I'm not trying to assert my being right or your being wrong and I'm not trying to be aggressively anti-drugs or threaten the way anybody does their thing, just clarifying what I said so it seems like less of a blanket statement.

I have a degree in Psychology and specialised in (psycho)pharmacology and the effects of recreational drugs in my second year. I know the science. But the raw numbers and chemical equations from all that doesn't amount to the end result. Mood before and after? Environment? Social aspects? Also the simple fact that it affects different people in different ways, some feel intense paranoia, some euphoria, some giggle incessantly. What about the strength or the strain?

Also you speak of creativity and mention 3 factors which I believe to be more attributed to *productivity* rather than creativity. So what of the effects grade has on things such as imagination, introspection, abstract thought and euphoria, even the mild psychedelic or hallucinogenic properties? All things I think can greatly enhance the creative process, in moderation and used at the right time.

pete bubonic wrote:
I have a degree in Psychology and specialised in (psycho)pharmacology and the effects of recreational drugs in my second year. I know the science. But the raw numbers and chemical equations from all that doesn't amount to the end result. Mood before and after? Environment? Social aspects? Also the simple fact that it affects different people in different ways, some feel intense paranoia, some euphoria, some giggle incessantly. What about the strength or the strain?

Also you speak of creativity and mention 3 factors which I believe to be more attributed to *productivity* rather than creativity. So what of the effects grade has on things such as imagination, introspection, abstract thought and euphoria, even the mild psychedelic or hallucinogenic properties? All things I think can greatly enhance the creative process, in moderation and used at the right time.

I don't have a degree, I went to university got bored and left. I wasn't implying you didn't know the science, I hope you didn't think I was, I was, as I said, just making my initial statement less of a blanket one and explaining it in a bit more detail. Anyway, I'm not going to try to pick apart what you've said or try to make your argument less valid. I'm just going to defend my own viewpoint which is largely based on my own reading (no I'm not some hippy who reads up on physics misunderstands it and then jumps to the conclusion that were all somehow magical energy beings) and experience (which is fairly large, I feel, given my teaching music for 3 years and being a music journalist for 2 - which put me right in the midst of a mass of musicians from all backgrounds and ages some using weed some not)

In that time I met and engaged with an absolute mass of musicians, most of whom I had fairly regular contact with and had a good idea of what was fueling their music. Here's what I saw: the clean cut people were writing the best music.

That is a generalization of course, there were exceptions to this rule, but in my time of talking to these musicians I came across a massive divide, here in Northern Ireland it was about 50:50 in terms of users of cannabis to those not using (at least in the active musical community anyway), and what I saw was that a good 7/10 people on the drug were writing absolutely awful music, while a good 7/10 people not on the drug were writing good; creative; original music. I guess you could chalk this up to coincidence or even pull the old "music is subjective" card if you'd like. But that's what I saw outside of myself and when you see that and you question it eventually the only conclusion you can come to when witnessing that is "weed makes you less discerning, not more creative" As for myself, I felt creative, but in actuality I had just become less discerning; my music suffered as a result. That's what I feel happened to a lot of those people I met who were using cannabis to fuel their music.

You might say that memory, concentration and problem solving are more integral to productivity, that's fair enough, to me, they're requirements of both productivity and creativity. I can't fathom the concept of being creative when your memory and concentration are impaired. Again, it is an oxymoron to me. As for imagination, I have this without drugs; introspection is also something I possess without drugs; abstract thought again needs no drugs to induce; euphoria... Ok, I'll give you euphoria, I need drugs for that one (usually) and psychedelics or hallucinogenics can't create anything an imagination doesn't equip you to create. Ultimately these things I don't feel require the use of drugs to induce and if we take that weed induces them all and ask the question, 'does this make you more creative?' well, again it comes to my assertion that there's a difference between creativity and being less discerning

Like I said, I don't want to pick apart what you're saying, I hope I haven't, I've just tried to defend my own viewpoint here, I hope you're not raging at me for disagreeing with you, I'm sure you not, but just to clarify (since this is a forum) I've nothing against you or your views, I just happen to disagree with you, and while you might have a degree, which is great, I do feel I've done enough reading on the subject and have enough of an active interest in knowledge and learning to come to conclusions that are still viable, I'm not a layman, I left university because I got bored, the classes moved to slow and I was learning far more on my own time, I've read the same material and more than any psychology/philosophy/literature student I know... Maybe Northern Ireland's standards of education are just really shit... But yea, from my own learning and experience I just can't honestly agree with you, I've never really witnessed weed enhancing somebody's creativity, it's never happened to me, and from what I've read it's damaging to what I consider to be vital assets of creativity, especially with long term use.

Dreadfunk wrote:
And if you feel like you need any drug to function in anything, producing or otherwise, then you have a problem.

yea? got some evidence to support this? no? didnt think so. back to your cave doctor knowswhatsbestforeveryone

Personally I hate the idea of relying upon any drug as a creative crutch. If you call yourself a creative person and yet feel that you need a spliff/pill/pint whatever to write tunes then that's a bit of contradiction. I can only really speak for myself in these matters, but I've never felt more creative on drugs (in fact I've always been more creative sober) and I think I'll always be skeptical of anyone who claims to be more creative on drugs.

But hey I'm a skeptic me.

chronicrecords wrote:

Dreadfunk wrote:
And if you feel like you need any drug to function in anything, producing or otherwise, then you have a problem.

yea? got some evidence to support this? no? didnt think so. back to your cave doctor knowswhatsbestforeveryone

Common sense? If you need an external psychoactive substance to do anything, then you have a drug dependency. Read: problem.

Now if you just like to smoke weed and produce, that's different. If you can't do it sober, then yeah, you got a problem. There's no proof needed.

didnt waste the time to read this thread but, weed is gods great gift to us unworth beings

Dreadfunk wrote:

chronicrecords wrote:

Dreadfunk wrote:
And if you feel like you need any drug to function in anything, producing or otherwise, then you have a problem.

yea? got some evidence to support this? no? didnt think so. back to your cave doctor knowswhatsbestforeveryone

Common sense? If you need an external psychoactive substance to do anything, then you have a drug dependency. Read: problem.

Now if you just like to smoke weed and produce, that's different. If you can't do it sober, then yeah, you got a problem. There's no proof needed.

I know this might be hard to accept, but some of us (like myself) do this for fun, some of us use production sessions as a method of unwinding, relaxing and just having fun. And regardless of the fact that some of us draw inspiration from different sources or muses. I personally hate going into the studio to write a new beat without a cider and snacks to keep me ticking over, maybe even a zoot if I'm just playing around with sounds. This doesn't mean I have a 'drug dependency', it means I just enjoy the effects (and the taste of decent cider) it has.

I'm sure we're all know of the wonderful stories of the classic jazz musicians battered on a vast selection of drugs, John Coltrane, Charlie Parker and alike. Would they have written some of the most bizarre, inspired and respected Jazz in the world, if they hadn't been out of their tree? Maybe it affected their confidence in themselves, maybe it truly did get a few extra synapses firing off that wouldn't have otherwise. I think taking a hard line stance either way is wrong myself. Different strokes for horses, etc.


Kaiori - Thanks for writing that out, I much prefer people describing their opinions based on personal experience rather than quoting science, 1. because it's usually wrong and 2. because there's so many factors involved in behaviour to say that something is due entirely or not due entirely on drugs (or any external stimuli) is dodgy ground and a bit irritating to me. Also uni was fucking massively boring especially for the first year, basic maths and shit. To be honest I nearly dropped out because I just wasn't enjoying it for a long time, but stuck it out as I had spent too much money and time to give it up by that point. Anyway, I digress. Only reason to bring up the degree was that I am aware of the science.

Everything you said, I agree with I have met plenty of producers making god awful music but have utter belief they are the next big thing or the music is superb or whatever, whether that's because of weed or not, I would struggle to say. there's a lot of egos involved in music, you have to have an ego of some description to put your music out in the public eye. And this gets the better of a lot of people (whereas I'm at the opposite end of the spectrum so haven't released anything in over a year and got so nervous when I did anyway).

However, there are plenty of A-List music producers I know personally bun weed when writing new ideas. Plenty that don't as well. But I could name (obviously I won't) a fair few stalwarts who regularly bun weed when writing beats, the majority of which will do mixdowns sober, because that's where the technical work comes in and the qualities/skills you quote are more required. But let's also consider my speaking of egos and confidence; I personally am fairly shy and get very nervous about music and whether I'm saying anything new. I can get frustrated easily in the studio, feeling pressured (especially when concerning releases) and alike doesn't help me write or get creative at all. Having zoot/pint (or two) relaxes me, gives me more confidence to do the things I would never try out sober in front of people, calm the nerves as such. I know a couple of close mates who feel the same way, especially when performing.

What I'm trying to say is that not that I even disagree with you, for your world, personality, brain chemistry and social circles, I believe what you stated holds true. I think it's different for every person though. For instance, weed is a very prolific drug in Bristol (out of all the Police Constabularies in the country, Bristol was the only one not to submit it's officer tests - read into that what you will), I think my first interaction it was when I was 14/15. I know few people who won't have bun a zoot after a particularly heavy night, and many people who use it regularly. A difference in demographics, ease of access, education, social acceptance, and personality exists in all places and this along with many other factors have massive effects on a wide range of topics let alone drug use. Then we have the individual's experiences, direct environment, behavioural traits and reactions. I personally believe there's too many factors here to say weed (or any drug) doesn't enhance creativity (or specific traits of creativity). Different horses for different folks etc.

Also, I believe in moderation. Yes, I have got battered and lean AS FUCK, written some shit only to listen to it sober in the morning and wonder what the fuck I was doing making a beatless, amelodic, bass hum go on for 32 minutes. I also wrote last saloon swagger (soul motive) and boat noodles (punch drunk) fairly lean and they're my best pieces.

I also believe Imma have to hack down the size of my signature.

pete bubonic wrote:

Dreadfunk wrote:

chronicrecords wrote:

Dreadfunk wrote:
And if you feel like you need any drug to function in anything, producing or otherwise, then you have a problem.

yea? got some evidence to support this? no? didnt think so. back to your cave doctor knowswhatsbestforeveryone

Common sense? If you need an external psychoactive substance to do anything, then you have a drug dependency. Read: problem.

Now if you just like to smoke weed and produce, that's different. If you can't do it sober, then yeah, you got a problem. There's no proof needed.

I know this might be hard to accept, but some of us (like myself) do this for fun, some of us use production sessions as a method of unwinding, relaxing and just having fun. And regardless of the fact that some of us draw inspiration from different sources or muses. I personally hate going into the studio to write a new beat without a cider and snacks to keep me ticking over, maybe even a zoot if I'm just playing around with sounds. This doesn't mean I have a 'drug dependency', it means I just enjoy the effects (and the taste of decent cider) it has.

You missed the point of my post.

My apologies I may have read it out of context as a quoted conversation, please re-explain what you meant as it reads as if you're saying if you need to get loose to do something then you have a problem? Definitions of 'need' bother me.

pete bubonic wrote:My apologies I may have read it out of context as a quoted conversation, please re-explain what you meant as it reads as if you're saying if you need to get loose to do something then you have a problem? Definitions of 'need' bother me.

I guess we are hung up on the definition of need then? Like I said, if you like to loosen up with a toke / drink before you produce, even if you do it every time, I have no issue with that, and I'm not saying you have a problem if you do so. If you like it, you like it. I support that!

My point was that if you think you HAVE to do it, as in, you can't produce otherwise (which i doubt is the case with almost anyone with any ability at all) then you might want to take a hard look. I'm not here to tell anyone what's best for them. If smoking weed every day is best for you, go for it. But when you think you NEED to smoke weed, well if it were me I'd be reticent to admit I need any drug. Need = dependency, by definition.