On Fri Nov 12 5:13 , '/0' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> sent: >maybe I misunderstand you, but its OK for mills to go on and on and on about >what is basically 4/4 bangers, while hawtin (who IS innovating and changing >sound through the years) is looked on as getting a bit too wanky? > >please correct me (respectfully) if I misunderstand you
Well, I never said anything about Mills, but I'd level the same criticism if he was saying that what he does achieves something grand, rather than saying that he achieves inspiration from grand ideas. And for the record, I wasn't so much having a go at Hawtin as the author of the article. who seemed to want to make it all seem earth-shattering. On Fri Nov 12 5:13 , '/0' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> sent: >maybe I misunderstand you, but its OK for mills to go on and on and on about >what is basically 4/4 bangers, while hawtin (who IS innovating and changing >sound through the years) is looked on as getting a bit too wanky? > >please correct me (respectfully) if I misunderstand you Well, I never said anything about Mills, but I'd level the same criticism if he was saying that what he does achieves something grand, rather than saying that he achieves inspiration from grand ideas (which is generally how I read his pontifications). And for the record, I wasn't so much having a go at Hawtin as the author of the article, who seemed to want to make it all earth-shattering (although I do think Hawtin has a tendency to get caught up in philosophical flavours of the month, from what I can glean from interviews). And this is not to say there isn't significance to the events we witness in a club, nor that some projects can't achieve lofty aspirations, but I don't like the idea that we need to intellectualise music in order to give it *extra* importance. Music *is* very important, but it doesn't need the window-dressing to make it more than what we experience in the immediate, in 99.99% of the cases. Tristan
