Not to add fuel or anything here, but I think it's really interesting the way the words 'hip' and 'hipster' get tossed around on these types of threads, because it seems completely opposite to the way my mom or the press or whoever uses it. Usually it seems like it gets pegged to something or someone known to a small or more exclusive group of people. Here it seems to get applied to stuff that is suddenly popular or known to a substantially LARGER group than the relatively smaller techno crew. Does this seem weirdly backwards to anyone else?
On Tue, Aug 17, 2004 at 06:33:28PM -0400, Thomas D. Cox, Jr. wrote: > ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- > From: "David Powers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >Apparently an artist is a "hipster" if they make good, > interesting, and new music, that turns a few heads outside of the > narrow world of this email list. > > it depends. if by turning heads you mean being listened to by the > same kind of people who dig electroclash or glitch house or > whatever the hipster electronic music to like was last month, then > youre right. you dont get too many electroclash heads suddenly > getting hyped up on UR despite their continually high quality > output. theyre not hipster techno. > > >I'll say this, however, Mathew Jonson music is very much in the > 313 tradition the way he uses synth lines, chords, and a fairly > stripped down sound - hey, wait a second, maybe all good techno > is "hipster"! If you don't like "hipster" techno, I bet there's a > pretty good chance you don't like a lot of techno generally. > > dont you see what youre saying? youre saying "matt jonson sounds > like techno to me, he uses all the same kinds of sounds and > structures." and i say "youre right, so why are hipsters all up on > it all of a sudden if they didnt like all the other techno that > sounds like that that comes out all the time?" > > this is how to spot hipster techno. > > tom > > ________________________________________________________________ > andythepooh.com > > > >
