I do think that the Basic Channel records were the definitive beginning of the techno-dub hybrid, but I often find myself trying to think of earlier tracks that combine that "stillness" (I know what you mean about the English vocabulary being insufficient to describe in detail the effects that sort of music has on the listener!) with the sort of spacial production in techno that BC subsequently perfected.
With that in mind, I'd definitely say Quadrant's "Infinition", which came out (AFAIK) before the Basic Channel records but which sounds like a test run for the BC sound, what with the use of delay and filters to add a bit of space to the main synth chords. But you could argue that the key concept that initially defined dub-techno was that of "origin unknown" sounds, sounds which you *couldn't* imagine or visualise coming from a particular machine. I doubt I'm explaining myself very well, but if you listen to "Infinition" you can practically see Carl and Moritz with a Kurzweil or whatever, manipulating the VCF slider, while if you jump forward in time to Radiance or Quadrant Dub you really can't picture the devices producing the sounds at all. In that sense, I'd agree with you about the Lyot track even though it doesn't have the "stillness"! Brendan | -----Original Message----- | From: Odeluga, Ken [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 11:20 AM | To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 313@hyperreal.org | Subject: RE: (313) what was the first dub-techno record ever? | | | Brendan - sounds like you were thinking abt this before I asked! | | ... so no one thinks the early Basic Channel tracks were a definitive | beginning of a dub/techno hybrid? | | For me, whilst something like 'Lyot's got the sea of reverb, it | just hasn't | got the 'stillness' (best word I can think of right now.) | | ... | | >-----Original Message----- | >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | >Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 9:43 AM | >To: 313@hyperreal.org | >Subject: RE: (313) what was the first dub-techno record ever? | > | > | >Memo from Alex Bond of PricewaterhouseCoopers | > | >-------------------- Start of message text -------------------- | > | >Alright, I'll bite.... | > | >Dub - techno? Never heard of it, but it has to be Eddy Grant's 'Timewarp' | >surely...? (1981) | > | > | > | > | >"Brendan Nelson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 11/10/2002 09:28:48 | > | >Please respond to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | >To: "Odeluga, Ken" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Phonopsia" | > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "[EMAIL PROTECTED] Ca" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, | > "[EMAIL PROTECTED] Org" <313@hyperreal.org> | >cc: | > | > | >Subject: RE: (313) what was the first dub-techno record ever? | > | >Good question! I always view the starting point of that strand | of music as | >being Quadrant's "Infinition" on Planet E, but for reasons I would find | >hard | >to back up in an argument R-Tyme's "Illusion" often sounds like a | >dub-techno | >record to me. | > | >Why? Well, practically every early techno record was produced with no | >noticable delay or reverb on any of the sounds - the music | sounded as if it | >was pressed directly on the surface of the vinyl. However the only early | >techno track I can think of which does use delay and reverb to | give a sense | >of space between the listener and the sounds on the record is "Illusion", | >which uses the dub-techno method of focusing the listener's | attention on a | >simple chord sequence and then allowing the chords to drift off into the | >ether. | > | >I can't think of any earlier record right now that uses the same "chord | >drift" technique so R-Tyme's "Illusion" would be my pick... | > | >Brendan | > | >| -----Original Message----- | >| From: Odeluga, Ken [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | >| Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 7:12 AM | >| To: Phonopsia; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ca; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Org | >| Subject: RE: (313) what was the first techno record ever? | >| | >| | >| OK, how abt a more specific question: What was the first 'Dub-techno' | >| record? (Deliberately vague.) | >| | >| I'm *not* assuming Mortiz von Oswald was involved either! | >| | >| Ken | >| | >| Audax: | >| >I completely agree on all of your points, and I wont post about it | >| >again. Its something I will look into doing when I have time to | >| >muck about. | >| > | >| >For something like this, you definately have to go to the sources. | >| | >| Tristan: | >| | >| >> I think we can safely say this is not the right list on which to | >| >> undertakethis project. Perhaps you should set up your website with | >| >> these questions, | > | > | > | > | >--------------------- End of message text -------------------- | > | >This e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is | >addressed. If an addressing or transmission error has | >misdirected this e-mail, please notify the author by replying to | >this e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient you must not | >use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. | > | >The principal place of business of PricewaterhouseCoopers and | >its associate partnerships is 1 Embankment Place, London | >WC2N 6RH where lists of the partners' names are available for | >inspection. All partners in the associate partnerships are | >authorised to conduct business as agents of, and all contracts | >for services to clients are with, PricewaterhouseCoopers. The | >UK firm of PricewaterhouseCoopers is authorised by the | >Financial Services Authority for investment business activities. | >PricewaterhouseCoopers is a member of the world-wide | >PricewaterhouseCoopers organisation. | > | >PricewaterhouseCoopers may monitor outgoing and incoming | >e-mails and other telecommunications on its e-mail and | >telecommunications systems. By replying to this e-mail you | >give your consent to such monitoring. | > | >---------------------------------------------------------------- | >Visit our website http://www.pwcglobal.com | > | > | >_________________________________________________________________ | >The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to | >which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged | >material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or | >taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or | >entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If | you received | >this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any | >computer. | > | >
