Dubstepforum.com

What would be naive is thinking there is no way to become pro. I'm 64 + 28 - 40 + 13 - 30 - 12 + 1 years old.

If you put your heart into it, obviously, and not if your tone deaf, also obviously. Plus why would anyone work on music for three years if they don't LOVE music?? It's not exactly a money maker when you're not a professional at it.

You could just say 24, y'know.

Sharmaji wrote:once the 1st check clears, you're a pro.

^^^
this.

wub wrote:You could just say 24, y'know.

I know.

This is not a question that can be answered...

If you give 10 people a computer and a midi keyboard and lock them up for 3 years, there is no guarantee any of them will be making "pro" music...

billybuxton wrote:This is not a question that can be answered...

If you give 10 people a computer and a midi keyboard and lock them up for 3 years, there is no guarantee any of them will be making "pro" music...

That's because it's ignorant to think someone can become a pro in 3 years

This all depends on your definition of pro.

This thread offers an interesting insight...

For the most part, it is the amateurs who seem to be attributing some sort of magical status (in terms of hours, knowledge, etc) to becoming "professional"... whereas the professionals in the thread are the first ones to dispel the myth.

So please, OP and others... please please take note: The only difference between a 'pro' and an 'amateur' is a paycheck. Becoming "pro" is NOT a destination... it is an early road marker on an infinitely long journey.


That said - the really good pro's... will still work harder than anyone. I know recording engineers who are gainfully employed, with several Grammys under their belt and a mic cabinet that bests anyone in a 500 mile radius.. and they STILL are constantly tweaking their setup (which preamp with which mic), making their own cables, etc... Those who go the distance do so not only because of their sense of 'professionalism' or their need for the paycheck... but there is usually an element of obsession as well... and that is how they became the best in the first place.

Just being devil's advocate here but by this reasoning, guys like Bieber are considered pro then?
I certainly wouldn't take anything he said in the context of music as valid.
Yet he gets asked to guest judge on X-Factor.
Is this because he is seen as a pro who has knowledge to give?

Or is pro just another term for popular?

Electric_Head wrote:Just being devil's advocate here but by this reasoning, guys like Bieber are considered pro then?
I certainly wouldn't take anything he said in the context of music as valid.
Yet he gets asked to guest judge on X-Factor.
Is this because he is seen as a pro who has knowledge to give?

Or is pro just another term for popular?

By definition, a pro is a professional, someone who's profession, eg trade, is what they make their money in. I'd
go further and make the distinction in music between pro and semi-pro, which would be someone who occasionally makes money from music but could not consider it their primary form of income.

By that definition, Justin Bieber is very much a pro. As pro as they come!

I agree.
Don't get me wrong.
I just think in the context of this forum, I can't see how he would have any knowledge that we would consider pro.
I'm sure you get my drift.

Electric_Head wrote:I agree.
Don't get me wrong.
I just think in the context of this forum, I can't see how he would have any knowledge that we would consider pro.
I'm sure you get my drift.

You're comparing apples to oranges

I reckon I'm comparing granny smith apples with golden delicious.
They're both apples.

I'm not trying to argue or anything.
I honestly was wondering this yesterday.

I'd say Justin Bieber has a huge amount of knowledge. How can anyone not have, being at the pinnacle of the commercial music industry like he is?

Doesn't matter whether you like his music or not.

That being said, doubt I'd ask him about FM synthesis or what linear phase EQ is though.

I think that's the point then.
He must be knowledgeable about quite a few things but when it comes to studio or actual music, I can't see him having a say I'd be interested in.
I am honestly trying to be objective here.
Not dissing him at all.
Just trying to understand the definition of pro in this context and I think you've explained it fairly well.

Why do you guys argue about the definition of "pro" when the OP clearly was refering to this as "decent skill to be able to produce and release music that won't sound trash technically compared to other guys".

I think that you can make tracks that sound technically correct and are commercially releasable in something between 3 to 4 years.
Some "notable" examples : Porter Robinson (mostly electro) released "Say My Name", the track that got him famous and launched his carrer, only 4 years after started producing music.
Kill the Noise, formerly known as "Ewun" started making music in around 2000, and his first "official" releases were 5 years later.

We can find people that "made it" even sooner, some others way later, but i think 3/4 years is the minimum amount of time to get to a point were from a technical perspective, your tracks sound correct.

But for sure, the subjective side of music is way different, there is innate talent, and skills that can be aquired through work. IMO this process can be way longer if you don't have any musical background. It can also never happen. I do believe in a certain "skill cap" in music creativity, which does not depend on your work, but just on pure talent.
Other important factors, being originality and ideas are, to me, something that you don't learn. Some of your tracks will have that extra thing, some won't, and this no matter how long you've been producing for.

FAARE FACED wrote:Why do you guys argue about the definition of "pro" when the OP clearly was refering to this as "decent skill to be able to produce and release music that won't sound trash technically compared to other guys".

because that is the definition of being a pro(fessional). Being paid for a skill.

Many people confuse 'pro' with being 'good' - as perhaps, did the OP. However, it is a term that is worth using correctly.

It takes as long as it takes...

Makes tunes that you like, if you end up being signed depends if one of the people who likes your tunes also owns a label.

Has anyone here heard of south london ordnance? he makes bass/techno stuff (whatever) but the point is, Im sure he had been producing summat like 9 months before he got his first release or got summat signed for release, and stuff being played by MAH etc. I dunno how long he has been producing now, but its got to be under 2 years, he has something coming on Hotflush, had stuff on Teal, Well Rounded, 2nd Drop, Audio Culture and maybe some more I dunno. So I dont think it really matter how long it 'can' take to be a pro, cos it can happen just like that. Actually I think that Pariah's first release on R&S were his first tunes he made.