Producing: Stoned vs Straight?

[Cosmophonic]

If you using that drug as a creative crutch than you got some serious issues

Cosign to a certain extent. One should check oneself when one HAS to smoke to be creative.... or do ANYTHING, for that matter. I smoke to chill out and experience things in an alternative way, get new viewpoints and such, but I don??t really like to make beats while stoned, even if it is... interesting.


- J

 

[z_illa]

my neck hurts when i get too stoned making beats.

 

[flatblackplastic]

every mixtape/cd ive ever made ive been stoned. i prefer making them while stoned, i prefer listening to music while stoned too. been that way for 15 years and i doubt its gonna change anytime soon. i even made this one little mix where i was out of my mind on opium as i wanted to have something to remember that trip by. to be honest i dont usually feel like working on mixes if i dont have any smoke. i got to have something to do while the records are mixing in!

i get high everyday, but you know what, i take care of my business.

 

[Shingaling]

My rule: I generally do drums first. Get them on time and your home free from there. Enter Bob Marley orbit!














And what Guzzo said.

 

[BeatChemist]

I can't beleive fokls have actually convinced themselves that weed makes them more creative. Shit slows down your reaction time and makes you relaxed and hungry.

I smoke a whole lot but I know that I ain't smoking to get better at making music, I'm puffin so I can finish this whole pizza and listen to this Ann Peebles the way I like to hear it.

If you using that drug as a creative crutch than you got some serious issues

Yeah I feel you. I don't rely on weed to get ideas or anything... it just puts me in the mood to work on music. I'm pretty sure I suffer from some sort of attention deficit disorder, and getting high allows me do direct all my energy into one place - be in music, cleaning, whatever. I can work just fine without it, but I tend to get high a lot anyways, and then when I get high I want to work on music... which results in me working on music high fairly often.

I agree that when the drug becomes a crutch, and you can't work without it, then it's a problem.

I do have a problem with people knocking the connection between drugs and creativity though. Drugs are all about changing your perspective, and I think being creative is closely related. For me, the drugs are more of a way to break down my own self-censorship. I'm highly critical of my own ideas, but when I'm high I just run with them. Sometimes the results are great, sometimes they're not.

I just don't think drugs are a black and white thing... too much is bad, but a little bit doesn't hurt.

 

[doodoobrown]

I can't beleive fokls have actually convinced themselves that weed makes them more creative. Shit slows down your reaction time and makes you relaxed and hungry.

If you using that drug as a creative crutch than you got some serious issues

I disagree, do whatever you feel allows you to be the most creative you can possibly be...

 

[alieNDN]

i would take a drug to feel sober

drugs are not productive for me...oh i love this frank zappa quote;

"people take drugs as a license to act like azzholes"

word is bond, do what u gotta do, but dont brag about smoking blunts like you've discovered fire, i always hate sheit like "damn he must have been high to make a song/movie/book like that". that is an insult. you're attributing peoples talents to synthetic sheit(ok organic in some cases but...) and deameaning their brains. give the brains credit.

 

[Sun_Fortune]

the definitive word:
drugs are for the listeners.

but then again, everyone drugs themselves in one way or another.

 

[Guzzo]

I can't beleive fokls have actually convinced themselves that weed makes them more creative. Shit slows down your reaction time and makes you relaxed and hungry.

If you using that drug as a creative crutch than you got some serious issues

I disagree, do whatever you feel allows you to be the most creative you can possibly be...



werd ,why judge when many so dope beats had been made lifted and will always be made lifted.
the 2 are part and parcel of hip hop production





bluntman and chronic
so you people beleive that it can only help?

trust me a whole lot of fools beleived that too...and you ain't ever heard of them.

Like I said I am pro-drugs but I am not for trying to justify it as a means to make better music.

talent lies within ones person not within a pipe

 

[doodoobrown]

I can't beleive fokls have actually convinced themselves that weed makes them more creative. Shit slows down your reaction time and makes you relaxed and hungry.

If you using that drug as a creative crutch than you got some serious issues

I disagree, do whatever you feel allows you to be the most creative you can possibly be...



werd ,why judge when many so dope beats had been made lifted and will always be made lifted.
the 2 are part and parcel of hip hop production





bluntman and chronic
so you people beleive that it can only help?

trust me a whole lot of fools beleived that too...and you ain't ever heard of them.

Like I said I am pro-drugs but I am not for trying to justify it as a means to make better music.

talent lies within ones person not within a pipe
i disagree, a lot of greatest music ever was made due to artists being at a point in their lives where they were dependent on drugs, alcohol etc...

 

[BeatChemist]

I can't beleive fokls have actually convinced themselves that weed makes them more creative. Shit slows down your reaction time and makes you relaxed and hungry.

If you using that drug as a creative crutch than you got some serious issues

I disagree, do whatever you feel allows you to be the most creative you can possibly be...



werd ,why judge when many so dope beats had been made lifted and will always be made lifted.
the 2 are part and parcel of hip hop production





bluntman and chronic
so you people beleive that it can only help?

trust me a whole lot of fools beleived that too...and you ain't ever heard of them.

Like I said I am pro-drugs but I am not for trying to justify it as a means to make better music.

talent lies within ones person not within a pipe
i disagree, a lot of greatest music ever was made due to artists being at a point in their lives where they were dependent on drugs, alcohol etc...
I think that's more to do with their situation, not drug use.

Don't want to come off like I'm some sort of super pro-drugs dude. They have their benefits and their drawbacks. Problem is a lot of the time the drawbacks can slowly begin to eclipse the benefits, without the user really noticing. That's the danger.

but then again, everyone drugs themselves in one way or another.

REAL TALK

 

[Guzzo]

so you people beleive that it can only help?

trust me a whole lot of fools beleived that too...and you ain't ever heard of them.

Like I said I am pro-drugs but I am not for trying to justify it as a means to make better music.

talent lies within ones person not within a pipe

i disagree, a lot of greatest music ever was made due to artists being at a point in their lives where they were dependent on drugs, alcohol etc...
not that I should even be debating this cause I think its pretty ridiculous, but you really believe it was thier drug dependency and not their talent that allowed them to make that music?

talent it talent and certain folks have it in abundance, now if they are able to get high and still do thier thing creatively more power to them, but the drugs didn't make the music the person did. To beleive that drug dependence makes you create better music is some weird counterculture philosophy with no real basis.

Once again I don't doubt that folks can be creative on drugs, however that creativity was within them and not that pill, pipe, or syringe.

An addict is not someone I look at as creative, rather I look at them as someone who needs help. George Clinton still high as mutha but he ain't made a hit in over 20 years

 

[doodoobrown]

so you people beleive that it can only help?

trust me a whole lot of fools beleived that too...and you ain't ever heard of them.

Like I said I am pro-drugs but I am not for trying to justify it as a means to make better music.

talent lies within ones person not within a pipe

i disagree, a lot of greatest music ever was made due to artists being at a point in their lives where they were dependent on drugs, alcohol etc...
not that I should even be debating this cause I think its pretty ridiculous, but you really believe it was thier drug dependency and not their talent that allowed them to make that music?

talent it talent and certain folks have it in abundance, now if they are able to get high and still do thier thing creatively more power to them, but the drugs didn't make the music the person did. To beleive that drug dependence makes you create better music is some weird counterculture philosophy with no real basis.

Once again I don't doubt that folks can be creative on drugs, however that creativity was within them and not that pill, pipe, or syringe.

An addict is not someone I look at as creative, rather I look at them as someone who needs help. George Clinton still high as mutha but he ain't made a hit in over 20 years


i disagree, while yes the talent is there i think in a lot of cases it took whatever drugs they were using to get them to take their creativity to that next level... take Jimi Hendrix for example... playing the chitlin' circuit and shit and even back then blowing minds but once he linked up with that tab of acid and those two u.k dudes it was on and poppin'... He took it to that next level, had he not fucked around dude might've still been fucking with the chitlin circuit on some same ol' same ol'... same with Miles and Coltrane and even Bird.

late.

 

[wholewheat]

so you people beleive that it can only help?

trust me a whole lot of fools beleived that too...and you ain't ever heard of them.

Like I said I am pro-drugs but I am not for trying to justify it as a means to make better music.

talent lies within ones person not within a pipe

i disagree, a lot of greatest music ever was made due to artists being at a point in their lives where they were dependent on drugs, alcohol etc...
not that I should even be debating this cause I think its pretty ridiculous, but you really believe it was thier drug dependency and not their talent that allowed them to make that music?

talent it talent and certain folks have it in abundance, now if they are able to get high and still do thier thing creatively more power to them, but the drugs didn't make the music the person did. To beleive that drug dependence makes you create better music is some weird counterculture philosophy with no real basis.

Once again I don't doubt that folks can be creative on drugs, however that creativity was within them and not that pill, pipe, or syringe.

An addict is not someone I look at as creative, rather I look at them as someone who needs help. George Clinton still high as mutha but he ain't made a hit in over 20 years


i disagree, while yes the talent is there i think in a lot of cases it took whatever drugs they were using to get them to take their creativity to that next level... take Jimi Hendrix for example... playing the chitlin' circuit and shit and even back then blowing minds but once he linked up with that tab of acid and those two u.k dudes it was on and poppin'... He took it to that next level, had he not fucked around dude might've still been fucking with the chitlin circuit on some same ol' same ol'... same with Miles and Coltrane and even Bird.

late.
Man, Jimi was a young dude when he died, consequently it is quite possible that he was still developing during the time he played the chitlin circuit and even throughout the rest of his (post LSD discovery) career. Do you think it was possible that his maturing as a musician merely coincided with his drug experimentation rather than his experimentation being the cause for his maturing? I think it is pretty likely.

 

[youngEINSTEIN]

stoned i just laugh and fall asleep. i'd be useless producing. stein. . .

 

[BeatChemist]

I really didn't mean for this to turn into some long debate over the exact relationship between drugs and creativity.

My stance on the whole issue is this: Yes, the talent and creativity that was needed to create the music/art was existent in the person seperate from the drugs. A person can also mature artistically - essentially accessing more of their own inner creativity/personality. This can surely be done sober. I tend to believe, however, that drug use and its relationship with art is important because it allows people to 'change their perspective', 'shed traditional thinking', 'expand consciously' - whatever you want to label it. It can be a very introspective and freeing experience. That is of course not universal - drugs do not equal freed minds and good art. But one can't ignore the part that drugs play in the history of art.

ps this may or may not be self reasoning for my habit. jury still out...

 

[Vagabond]

Experience is directly related to ones music/art. Drugs are a part of ones experience. Alot of heroin junkies made really deep, emotional music. Heroin users experience the extremes of the spectrum when it comes to highs and lows. These experiences obviously affected the music being made, as they are reflections of the artists conscious. e.g Velvet Underground, Coltrane, Miles Davis, Marvin Gaye, Jerry Garcia etc.

 

[DocDaDollaBin]

"TO EACH IS OWN, TO EACH AS OWN..." INI

I'LL BE HONEST, WHETHER IT BE PRODUCING,WRITING,BREAKING, OR WHAT NOT. I GET A CERTAIN VIBE WHEN I'M HIGH AND LISTENING TO MUSIC. THE BEATS THAT I HEAR SOUNDS MORE CLEAR AND I'M MOVED AND INSPIRED TO CREATE NEW IDEAS AT THAT CERTAIN MOMENT. I DON'T NEED TO GET LIFTED TO DO SUCH THINGS BUT I'LL ADMIT, THAT MOMENT OF SPACING OUT SURE GET'S ME HUNGRY! PEACE