> because it sounds better that a lot of contemporary dance > music.
To you. So that is an excuse for LFO to keep making the same tracks over and over? I don't buy it. While diehard fans might want an artist to stay in their personal favorite period (to your ears 'the best' period) forever, the vanguard artists will always want (for better or worse) to push a sound forward, especially in a genre like techno that rewards innovation. You can't freeze a musical time period and put it in a bottle and expect to keep progress at the same time. Get over it. > How about using some of the same concepts bleep and > bassline sound instead of 'rehashing' with out > making it sound like stupid tech-house/basic channel/ > micro house/broken beat/ stupid stupid stupid. Who said his new material is trying to be something else? If it doesn't sound like old LFO and you're going to be unhappy, well start get disappointed now because it probably doesn't. You could take it up with the artist, see how far you get. Ha ha The "stupid" labels you mention are just words that became labels for artists pushing things in different directions, thus they got named to separate or highlight them. If they didn't move in different directions, we'd all be stuck in a rut and all electronic dance music (or whatever) would sound much more similar even than it does today. Things change, morph, take in old and new influences and move where the artist wants to take things next, get over it. Techno will never go back to the way it was 10-15 years ago, nor does it need to. Peace, Matt MacQueen
