--- Matthew MacQueen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 
> 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.

Well not so much making the same tracks just using some of the ideas 
in LFO's first album such as the sub basslines.
What artist like Dave Clarke and Neil Landstrum were doing in the mid 90's 
are good examples of people using concepts of the older techno 
sound.

> 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. 

Techno is basically a late 80's early 90's music genre, it's like "electro".
Based in drum machine and synthesizer music.
Comparing today's music to techno from 10 or 15 years ago is like comparing 
the original Star Wars Trilogy to the newer movies like Episode 1.
Is newer better? well no because in this case newer technology was not utilized 
correctly to
improve on an old concept which had room for some improvement.

 





=====

Reply via email to