>"Techno-purists" are into minimal repetition for a reason, the reason being >that repetition and minimalism is appealing and more so, comforting, in that >there is very little information to interpret. In other words, I think that >the "techno-purist" tends to be introverted (very sensitive to environment >and stimulation), thus gravitating towards to rawest art, in this case >techno...
>Moby and people like good 'ol Oakie have a tendency to attract the opposite, >extroverts (not so sensitive to stimulation), people who need even more >input then techno has, they need more than a raw emotion spooned out, >they >need defined emotion to fell truly satisfied... have to disagree with you. while some people may fit the descriptions above i don't think you can generalize a whole group of people in this manner. this dimension is far too complicated for that, there are just too many variables. <the music needs the listener to be complete, repetition is <merely a blue-print in which frames the listeners emotions in a stable <platform- without real listeners, repetition is merely that, repetition i do agree though, with minimal music much of what is heard seems to be projection. -----Original Message----- > From: darw_n [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 4:05 PM > To: Jongsma, K.J.; 313@hyperreal.org > Subject: Re: [313] Let's Talk Techno > > >For the 'techno-purists' amongst us Moby will never be real. > > For others who aren't so purist-like really don't care that much. > > > > > I was simply waiting for that to be stated, and I apologize now for the > length, this field is a passion of mine, and I enjoy testing new theories > in > debate... > > Anyways, I got into this on the Axis site during the drum talk. I truly > feel that there is not a measurable difference between the quality of say > Moby vs.. Paul Mac, both are pretty much on the same plain as far as over > all skill is concerned. But I insist, we all _must_ realize the seeds of > argument in which has been circulating for the entire existence of our > musics; that we all must realize that there are stark, and rarely > recognized > differences amongst the listener... > > "Techno-purists" are into minimal repetition for a reason, the reason > being > that repetition and minimalism is appealing and more so, comforting, in > that > there is very little information to interpret. In other words, I think > that > the "techno-purist" tends to be introverted (very sensitive to environment > and stimulation), thus gravitating towards to rawest art, in this case > techno... > > Moby and people like good 'ol Oakie have a tendency to attract the > opposite, > extroverts (not so sensitive to stimulation), people who need even more > input then techno has, they need more than a raw emotion spooned out, they > need defined emotion to fell truly satisfied... > > Ever notice a techno freak listening to a Van Dyke record? The result is > often anxiety. Same with a out going socialite listening to Oliver Ho > playing locked grooves, their anxious because they're waiting for some > defining moment to occur... > > The magic that techno-purists feel however is something very unique, > albeit, > not in any way "better". Because of the repetition and raw emotion of > techno (as opposed to the defined emotion of say "epic-trance"), the > listener/dancer has his/her emotional autonomy _returned_ to them, a first > in modern music BTW (as far as I can tell, aside from tribal, correct me > if > I am wrong), the music needs the listener to be complete, repetition is > merely a blue-print in which frames the listeners emotions in a stable > platform- without real listeners, repetition is merely that, repetition. > The is starkly different from pop music or epic trance in which the > listener > is fully controlled and told what to feel, it would be difficult to feel > real anger during Binary Finary, but no one can truly describe any single > set of emotions behind any Rob Hood record because it is unique from > listener to listener... > > I call this music/listener relationship in techno "toneshifting" in that > the > tendency to a person locked into a groove with techno is to project > outwards > melody which isn't there, they shift the tone of the track in their head. > This again shows the beauty of techno in that each person listening may > very > well be hearing something entirely different than the person standing next > to you... > > I also propose that this is the fuel behind the earlier experiments of > modern art, cubism, abstraction, ect., the artists (who funny enough, tend > to be super introverts!!) were trying to return the autonomy back to the > viewer, a single block of yellow painted on canvas is pure and undefined, > it > is raw emotion, nothing else. It is the job of the viewer to project out > onto the painting and add the emotional definition, thus making the > painting > totally unique from one person to the next. This is why it's silly to go > to > openings like many that I do, and try to "figure out the artists pain" in > a > picture that simply is a couple of simple shapes, man, its _your_ job to > put > _your_ "pain" or happiness onto the picture, forget the artist... > > I drift. > > To finalize, the debate between Moby and Hood or whatever will never be > solved in that they are two entirely different forms of art, despite the > use > of the same medium. One is entertainment (Moby) one is guidance (techno), > and it's your personality type the determines which art you need most for > emotional gratification... > > And last but certainly not least, techno can never be defined because it > would require a definition of every Toneshift in every mind and in every > ear... > > sorry about the length, > > darw_n > > "create, demonstrate, toneshift..." > http://www.mp3.com/darw_n > http://www.sphereproductions.com/topic/Darwin.html > http://www.mannequinodd.com > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]