Jump to content

What are you career goals?


Recommended Posts

I've always had a fondness for literature, so if I can ever stop being lethargic and actually dedicate to the projects I start, I could have something going for me. My problem is that I craft numerous ideas and love doing so, but when I begin working on them, I get distracted.

Second to that would be making music and just putting myself out there for the fun of it. I don't want global recognition, I just want people to enjoy the music I'd make. So one could say I'm rather taken to careers in the arts.

Wouldn't mind trying my hand at game development. I've had some ideas jotted down and saved on various flash drives where I've coined up basic ideas and mechanics, overall gameplay elements and improvements that could be made to existing titles in the market (more for fun, that). There's something about creating something outta an idea that really inspires me.

Edited by alrubedo
Link to post
Share on other sites

Statistics can be misleading. If we say 99% of people that want to be pro composers don't achieve their goal, that doesn't say much about their backgrounds, work ethic, methods, etc. A guy who pirates FL Studio and some orchestral plugins, makes some tracks and complains about not getting AAA gigs is different than someone who puts in the years of practice, networking, research, etc. If we were to see the success rate at a more granular level I think you would find that the people who DO put in the time + effort are a lot more successful in the end.

Link to post
Share on other sites
if by "you totally can" you mean "you .1% can", then yes. unfortunately that leaves you a 99.9% chance of failing. in this unsure economy i would rather bet on a much more sure thing than an industry that simply has more supply than demand.

Then again, there's always something like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajMpfPYlHi4

The route I'm taking right now--admittedly, with some significant financial blessings along the way, such as having college paid for

(and graduating with absolutely ZERO debt!), etc.--is to get good at something that will likely make me a lot of money if I stay in that field, and then also try and get to the point where I'm at a professional level in the music world as well. I work in IT, where I make good money and have a lot of room for growth, have a good, versatile degree, and have enough experience and connections to probably do very well in the technical field.

That said, I'd run away from all that in a heartbeat if I get some opportunity to work on a record or tour or something, even if it means just making enough to scrape by on. And honestly, while I'm still young and single, I might try something really crazy yet, like selling all my stuff and then travelling for a year. Nobody's counting on me for income, so why not take some chances?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to become a legal advisor once I complete my law studies (if everything goes well, 2 years from now -- could have been 1, but I haven't accepted in second year of Master). I did civil/criminal law, and stating intellectual property.

If possible, I'd love to compose for games/movies as a part-time job, or during my free time. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Statistics can be misleading. If we say 99% of people that want to be pro composers don't achieve their goal, that doesn't say much about their backgrounds, work ethic, methods, etc. A guy who pirates FL Studio and some orchestral plugins, makes some tracks and complains about not getting AAA gigs is different than someone who puts in the years of practice, networking, research, etc. If we were to see the success rate at a more granular level I think you would find that the people who DO put in the time + effort are a lot more successful in the end.

I know countless rock bands who don't learn anything about music, don't practice, etc. but insist that the reason they fail is because of "piracy" and shit like that.

Few musicians of any variety actually have the skill, dedication and networking sense to actually go anywhere and I think you need all three - especially that last one.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It's what Zircon said. The only reason 99% of people who want to be musicians might not make it is because they aren't all trying their hardest.

"There are never any traffic jams on the extra mile."

-I don't know who said that but it applies.

Good quote, but also

I wouldn't say that's the only reason. It just might be the most common reason.

It depends on how you are defining "musician". A person who just plays violin is probably going to have a hard time finding any paid work at all. The type of gigs they can get are limited to playing in an orchestra for films and games, playing on cruise ships, session work or teaching. For a violinist, all of those jobs are extremely scarce and even if you do land a major gig nothing says that you'll ever get another major gig again. In orchestra land, "major gig" is usually limited to playing in orchestras that record for media or are prestigious ensembles that host critically-acclaimed concerts. You have to be the best of the best to play with those ensembles. You can increase your chances by being a multi-instrumentalist, but that is often impractical as it takes many many years to get really good at just one and a lifetime to master.

That's just one example, but the fact remains that the majority of musical disciplines are simply not practical means of making money because their value is mostly found in nothing more than entertainment. The most practical musical discipline with which to make money I'd say is "composer" or other musical disciplines that can be considered a "service" rather than "entertainment". A bar or other musical venue can continue to function without live bands and music production houses and composers do not require live musicians in most instances thanks to technology. Media requires music and it needs someone to create that music. Films, games, TV, radio ads, etc. that use orchestra require orchestrators, conductors and sound engineers who often work freelance. These are the most viable musical career paths because they provide a service to a company and product that require music. As we all know, competition here is fierce. You have to be very good at what you do and very well connected. Even if you are both of these things though, making consistent money is a perpetual challenge.

A challenge which hard work alone may not be enough to overcome.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When i was a young teenager i wanted to be a teacher. I like to explain things to others and help them get better at said things. I also like when others take that same time to help me learn things... Anyway some years later i had this desire to become a crime scene investigator. The idea of solving crimes and finding out the truth behind stuff would have been so satisfying for my curious and "want to know everything" personality. Psychologist is something that i would have liked as well, helping others on a more personal level. Lawyer is yet another job that i would have liked to do... None of this ever happened though.

I didn't continue my studies after i graduated from high school. It was a hard and dark period of my life because of what was going on outside of school life. So i decided to go out on the job market and for the next 10 years i had some minimum wage or just a bit above minimum wage jobs. It was hard for me to have any dreams when you live paycheck by paycheck just to get your basic needs covered. Almost two years ago i found a very decent job that pays well and i don't have to break my back either, with a pension plan and health insurance. So the plan now is to stick to this job for as long as i can, because i finally feel that i can provide for my family.

So if anyone reading this today is still in his school however old you are, do not give up. You are doing yourself a huge service.

As for music i compose at a very slow pace when and if i get inspired. My motivation isn't so high right now. So even if i only get a few downloads every now and then or if something unexpected happens then i will be happy. I know those are pretty minimalistic goals but i suppose this is where i have to start and then become eager to reach the next hurdles.

By the way, that Jim Carrey video, very inspirational.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Good quote, but also

I wouldn't say that's the only reason. It just might be the most common reason.

It depends on how you are defining "musician". A person who just plays violin is probably going to have a hard time finding any paid work at all. The type of gigs they can get are limited to playing in an orchestra for films and games, playing on cruise ships, session work or teaching. For a violinist, all of those jobs are extremely scarce and even if you do land a major gig nothing says that you'll ever get another major gig again. In orchestra land, "major gig" is usually limited to playing in orchestras that record for media or are prestigious ensembles that host critically-acclaimed concerts. You have to be the best of the best to play with those ensembles. You can increase your chances by being a multi-instrumentalist, but that is often impractical as it takes many many years to get really good at just one and a lifetime to master.

Lindsey Stirling pulled it off. Don't give me an excuse yet. Why'd she pull it off? Because she stands out. She's ridiculously unique. I don't really prefer her stuff but she has every right to have the popularity she does, because she did something entirely differently. I mean, she can freaking do an entire dance routine playing the violin, over well-produced EDM most of the time, and it actually works. I don't really like it, but I can't lie and say it sucks. It works. And it's super different because no one else does that.

The thing is that every super successful artist--even if they only ever have a one hit wonder--usually gain that success out of creating something different. The stupid mistake labels make is having the mindset of "wow, everyone likes that new sound that guy created, I bet it will make us a bunch of money if we have our artists do that exact sound." And often that scheme works, but for a very limited time. Of course, labels just want money. They don't really care about the artistic image of the artist. At least not for the most part. An artist with a unique sound is going to pop out. And in the long run, what the artist is known for lasts longer than the money he gains from it.

As we all know, competition here is fierce. You have to be very good at what you do and very well connected. Even if you are both of these things though, making consistent money is a perpetual challenge.

Uh, heck yeah. It's freaking hard to get in it. Doesn't mean it's impossible.

Ha. Truth is in this day and age, if you suck, you'll probably get more attention. Actually good artists who weren't gaining any attention ended up making stupid music (which, let's be honest, it's funny... the first guy that comes to mind is Krispy Kreme/Froggy Fresh Raps and IceJJFish) and what happened? Money everywhere. It's both hilarious and the most pathetic thing ever. Everyone loves listening to horrible crap because it's funny. I get that.

But then the legitimately talented guys are struggling to even make it out there. It's frustrating. I remember there was some celebrity host I think (I don't remember who) that saw a video of IceJJFish (an intentionally horrible R&B singer) and he was honestly frustrated because while he claimed he worked pretty hard to end up gaining the success from what he did, this dude uploaded a video of himself singing horribly intentionally and the guy ended up racking up at least 25 million views and a crapton of money and some legit fame. Like what?

I definitely don't think it's impossible though because I continue to move forward and I am way ahead of where I was even only a year ago. I believe it's possible, but yeah, it's super hard. I can't deny that. But like I said, I love a good challenge. :)

Also, good marketing decisions. I couldn't believe how important this was until a year or two ago. You can't expect people to come falling at your knees with a bunch of money begging for albums and gigs by just throwing up an album on the internet even if you're a really talented guy. It unfortunately doesn't work. Horrible artists with good marketing decisions almost always end up being far more successful than the fantastic artist with the bad marketing moves.

Edited by Garrett Williamson
Link to post
Share on other sites
Lindsey Stirling pulled it off. Don't give me an excuse yet. Why'd she pull it off? Because she stands out. She's ridiculously unique. I don't really prefer her stuff but she has every right to have the popularity she does, because she did something entirely differently. I mean, she can freaking do an entire dance routine playing the violin, over well-produced EDM most of the time, and it actually works. I don't really like it, but I can't lie and say it sucks. It works. And it's super different because no one else does that.

The thing is that every super successful artist--even if they only ever have a one hit wonder--usually gain that success out of creating something different. The stupid mistake labels make is having the mindset of "wow, everyone likes that new sound that guy created, I bet it will make us a bunch of money if we have our artists do that exact sound." And often that scheme works, but for a very limited time. Of course, labels just want money. They don't really care about the artistic image of the artist. At least not for the most part. An artist with a unique sound is going to pop out. And in the long run, what the artist is known for lasts longer than the money he gains from it.

Uh, heck yeah. It's freaking hard to get in it. Doesn't mean it's impossible.

Ha. Truth is in this day and age, if you suck, you'll probably get more attention. Actually good artists who weren't gaining any attention ended up making stupid music (which, let's be honest, it's funny... the first guy that comes to mind is Krispy Kreme/Froggy Fresh Raps and IceJJFish) and what happened? Money everywhere. It's both hilarious and the most pathetic thing ever. Everyone loves listening to horrible crap because it's funny. I get that.

But then the legitimately talented guys are struggling to even make it out there. It's frustrating. I remember there was some celebrity host I think (I don't remember who) that saw a video of IceJJFish (an intentionally horrible R&B singer) and he was honestly frustrated because while he claimed he worked pretty hard to end up gaining the success from what he did, this dude uploaded a video of himself singing horribly intentionally and the guy ended up racking up at least 25 million views and a crapton of money and some legit fame. Like what?

I definitely don't think it's impossible though because I continue to move forward and I am way ahead of where I was even only a year ago. I believe it's possible, but yeah, it's super hard. I can't deny that. But like I said, I love a good challenge. :)

Also, good marketing decisions. I couldn't believe how important this was until a year or two ago. You can't expect people to come falling at your knees with a bunch of money begging for albums and gigs by just throwing up an album on the internet even if you're a really talented guy. It unfortunately doesn't work. Horrible artists with good marketing decisions almost always end up being far more successful than the fantastic artist with the bad marketing moves.

Lindsey Stirling is just one example. Violins have been used in EDM before as has performing with any kind of musical instrument while dancing. Being "unique" isn't as much of an advantage as you think it is because the second anyone does something unique that is cool, everyone else starts following suit and now you're among countless doing it. A few years ago, Amaranthe "stood out" because they mixed EDM with melodic death metal and had a mix of growls and sung vocals. Now I hear more and more bands doing that...oh, and bloodstain child was doing this whole EDM death metal thing years before Amaranthe. So much for being "unique".

Also, where did I say it was "impossible"? I said it's not a reliable means of making money - which I didn't say was a reason not to try.

Edited by AngelCityOutlaw
Link to post
Share on other sites
Lindsey Stirling is just one example. Violins have been used in EDM before as has performing with any kind of musical instrument while dancing. Being "unique" isn't as much of an advantage as you think it is because the second anyone does something unique that is cool, everyone else starts following suit and now you're among countless doing it. A few years ago, Amaranthe "stood out" because they mixed EDM with melodic death metal and had a mix of growls and sung vocals. Now I hear more and more bands doing that...oh, and bloodstain child was doing this whole EDM death metal thing years before Amaranthe. So much for being "unique".

Also, where did I say it was "impossible"? I said it's not a reliable means of making money - which I didn't say was a reason not to try.

I don't think you entirely read what I said hahaha. I had stated that record labels (and often artists themselves) get this mindset that "oh this guy did a new unique thing--everybody, we'll make a lot more money if we do the exact same thing" which always happens. Doesn't mean that "being unique" isn't an advantage. Often artists are titled the "pioneers" of the specific style because they began it before a crap-ton of others started doing it too.

It always happens. You do something unique and people are going to follow. Period. "So much for being unique" is silly because whoever started it (or made it popular) still will go down in history for it. The pioneers almost always get noticed, often more than any of the "followers", if you will. You may be "among countless doing it", but there's a difference between the leader and the follower.

I always strive to be the leader.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My career goals are vague, but in the end, here's what I want out of my life:

+ The ability to work anywhere, any time. From home if I so desire, at 4 AM if I so desire. Completely alone, preferably.

+ Basic financial stability, but most importantly, the ability to support my family so they have financial stability too if things don't work out for them.

+ The time to support my hobbies, whether they're music, video games, coding personal projects, putting together Gundam models, whatever.

+ The ability to dress how I want and look how I want. I want tattoos. Blue hair. A kickass goth wardrobe and an entire drawer of band/geek/game t-shirts.

+ A cat.

Right now, my professional discipline is computer programming, with an emphasis on PHP. I'm in school right now, and I'm miserable, for the most part. While my work is online, going to class is annoying. Having homework gets in the way of doing things I'd like to do, like writing my text-based RPG or learning how the new Unreal Engine works.

Or becoming a producer.

God, it has been so frustrating to me how I haven't had the time to even watch Zircon's tutorials on how to produce. I hate how I'm living in a small town and the closest city with a good electronic scene is a six-hour drive away. I am so, so frustrated with my life right now. I really hate having to "look normal" to make it easier to find a potential job when I graduate (if I graduate at this point - my sanity and health are suffering so badly I might drop out this late in the game).

I am so frustrated with how it feels like I have no control over my life.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I always strive to be the leader.

Shouldn't music be more about being a wanderer than a leader? If one leads, one has expectations placed upon them. If one wanderers, they're more free to do as they want.

While there are bands and artists out there repeating styles of music others before them have done, it could be as simple as that style of music resonates with them above any other.

Like a friend of mine recently had said he was getting out of metal because it all sounds the same. I found that while part of his statement was true, one can always find 'unique' bands if you seek them, but we're always going to run into bands that 'sound like' someone else. It's like literature - we'll always run into authors whose books read like another.

I think what the music industry and scene lacks is flexibility in opinions towards artists. People are torn on Amy Lee doing more electronica style music, but she stated she wanted to do something different from the norm. And why not let her? Music should be about exploration and finding that which connects with you, then making more of, fine tuning one's craft in that style until you feel its time to move on to a new style.

That's just my opinion, though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Shouldn't music be more about being a wanderer than a leader? If one leads, one has expectations placed upon them. If one wanderers, they're more free to do as they want.

While there are bands and artists out there repeating styles of music others before them have done, it could be as simple as that style of music resonates with them above any other.

Like a friend of mine recently had said he was getting out of metal because it all sounds the same. I found that while part of his statement was true, one can always find 'unique' bands if you seek them, but we're always going to run into bands that 'sound like' someone else. It's like literature - we'll always run into authors whose books read like another.

I think what the music industry and scene lacks is flexibility in opinions towards artists. People are torn on Amy Lee doing more electronica style music, but she stated she wanted to do something different from the norm. And why not let her? Music should be about exploration and finding that which connects with you, then making more of, fine tuning one's craft in that style until you feel its time to move on to a new style.

That's just my opinion, though.

No, I definitely get what you're saying and I agree. By being "the leader", I'm "wandering" into new territory, and trying things different and unique, if that makes sense. By trying to "be the leader"--which in my context more just means to be unique and stand out from the crowd (and if successful, being the "leader" of that new style)--I'm getting into territory that may have not been explored before.

However, what I love is when unique people simply stand out. They're not just the leaders or pioneers of a specific genre, style, or sound, but they're one of the only ones that does it the way they do, if not the only one. That takes some major talent. Artists like Imogen Heap. Imogen Heap... I mean I really have never heard anyone like her. She's a genre of her own. And I mean there are artists that do a specific genre but sound very unique and I love that and for the most part that's what I've been talking about here. For example, anybody can tell when a song is by Katy Perry, even if her stuff is pretty mainstream pop-oriented. But now that I'm on that topic, she's kind of an example of a "pioneer" or "leader" of a style. She (and/or her producers) got into some different territory and created sounds that hadn't been used in that particular genre before. And then for a while, quite a few other artists were trying to grab that sound.

That's what I love. I love both the person who's just completely unique and no one can even follow along, and I love the person who's completely unique in a way that he/she is a leader/pioneer of the sound and so they own it, and others may often follow. Am I making sense? Sometimes I don't and I wanna make sure that by trying to explain that statement, I'm not making things more confusing. :-P

Link to post
Share on other sites
No, I definitely get what you're saying and I agree. By being "the leader", I'm "wandering" into new territory, and trying things different and unique, if that makes sense. By trying to "be the leader"--which in my context more just means to be unique and stand out from the crowd (and if successful, being the "leader" of that new style)--I'm getting into territory that may have not been explored before.

However, what I love is when unique people simply stand out. They're not just the leaders or pioneers of a specific genre, style, or sound, but they're one of the only ones that does it the way they do, if not the only one. That takes some major talent. Artists like Imogen Heap. Imogen Heap... I mean I really have never heard anyone like her. She's a genre of her own. And I mean there are artists that do a specific genre but sound very unique and I love that and for the most part that's what I've been talking about here. For example, anybody can tell when a song is by Katy Perry, even if her stuff is pretty mainstream pop-oriented. But now that I'm on that topic, she's kind of an example of a "pioneer" or "leader" of a style. She (and/or her producers) got into some different territory and created sounds that hadn't been used in that particular genre before. And then for a while, quite a few other artists were trying to grab that sound.

That's what I love. I love both the person who's just completely unique and no one can even follow along, and I love the person who's completely unique in a way that he/she is a leader/pioneer of the sound and so they own it, and others may often follow. Am I making sense? Sometimes I don't and I wanna make sure that by trying to explain that statement, I'm not making things more confusing. :-P

You basically said you like it when someone establishes their own unique sound palette / style, and might attract an amount of people to imitating that unique established style. Makes sense to me. I can tell when I'm listening to PrototypeRaptor, Jivemaster, WillRock, etc. because they wanted to stick to a reasonably consistent sound palette.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You basically said you like it when someone establishes their own unique sound palette / style, and might attract an amount of people to imitating that unique established style. Makes sense to me. I can tell when I'm listening to PrototypeRaptor, Jivemaster, WillRock, etc. because they wanted to stick to a reasonably consistent sound palette.

Totally. I love when artists will dive into a new sound and try something different but they've always got at least a little bit that straight up says "this is [insert artist here]" just by hearing it. I use MJ as an example for everything. He changed his sound a bunch but you could always tell it was him, just by the way he did it. You just can tell. They establish their own little unique sound and even when they may change it up quite a bit, you can still hear it.

I'm now officially rambling on and on. Pretty sure I repeated myself a few times there. hahaha

Link to post
Share on other sites
No, I definitely get what you're saying and I agree. By being "the leader", I'm "wandering" into new territory, and trying things different and unique, if that makes sense. By trying to "be the leader"--which in my context more just means to be unique and stand out from the crowd (and if successful, being the "leader" of that new style)--I'm getting into territory that may have not been explored before.

However, what I love is when unique people simply stand out. They're not just the leaders or pioneers of a specific genre, style, or sound, but they're one of the only ones that does it the way they do, if not the only one. That takes some major talent. Artists like Imogen Heap. Imogen Heap... I mean I really have never heard anyone like her. She's a genre of her own. And I mean there are artists that do a specific genre but sound very unique and I love that and for the most part that's what I've been talking about here. For example, anybody can tell when a song is by Katy Perry, even if her stuff is pretty mainstream pop-oriented. But now that I'm on that topic, she's kind of an example of a "pioneer" or "leader" of a style. She (and/or her producers) got into some different territory and created sounds that hadn't been used in that particular genre before. And then for a while, quite a few other artists were trying to grab that sound.

That's what I love. I love both the person who's just completely unique and no one can even follow along, and I love the person who's completely unique in a way that he/she is a leader/pioneer of the sound and so they own it, and others may often follow. Am I making sense? Sometimes I don't and I wanna make sure that by trying to explain that statement, I'm not making things more confusing. :-P

Oh, no! I understand you completely! And I can see what you mean a bit more clearly now. So in a sense, being a wanderer and a leader fall in step with each other, and whenever a person who's unique themselves stand out and produces something amazing, that's what you like.

It's kind of like how I feel about several remixers from here. Up until about a year or so ago, I didn't like dubstep, and I certainly didn't mesh multiple forms of music to form a new identity of music, but now, thanks to keeping up with the projects (and now the DoD), I've expanded my musical tastes by co-relating the inspirations behind a remixers style (if they've ever stated it) and then going out and finding music of that style that resonates with me.

I think that's another intended effect of people who stand out with their music is that they open the eyes of people who never knew such a thing was possible, and I have to say, it's an amazing effect.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...