In response to this article (sorry, not sure who wrote it; credit seems
unclear from the website. "testindustries"?)...
At 19:08 2007.07.26, Wojtek wrote:
From a techno blog some may already be familiar with:
http://testindustries.typepad.com/test/2007/07/past-mastered.html
Past mastered
This topic has been discussed in some of the forums recently, and it
was something that I wanted to post about before I went away. The fact
that I'm only getting around to it now says more about my poor
time-management skills than anything else. Anyway, enough excuses,
here goes; has anyone noticed the way that the same limited set of
releases are getting played and charted all the time?
Noticed.
I'm not trying to diss the legal digital download sites - hey, I even
work for one - but it seems like the opposite is now happening to what
the gatekeepers of the digital revolution had originally predicted.
Remember a few years back, all the talk about the unlimited choice
that the availability of electronic music in digital formats promised,
the way we'd be able to buy the most obscure release or that the
staggering range that these groundbreaking services offered would make
it easier for even an aspiring DJ to differentiate him/herself from
the pack. Unfortunately, it hasn't quite turned out that way, yet the
sites can't be blamed: even a cursory look at Beatport reveals an
exhaustive catalogue of music, but the problem is that nearly all of
the users seem unwilling to delve deeper than the current top 10 or
recommendations from their favourite DJs.
Ironically, although it has never been easier to access electronic
music, the range of what is being consumed, bought and played is
getting narrower and narrower.
Why is the reverse happening of what was predicted? Some of it can be
explained by laziness: broadband connections, combined with the
proliferation of Beatport, Juno, Kompakt et al means that it has never
been easier to quickly acquire the same collection/Top 10 as the
Hawtins, Mayers and Clarkes (or insert your own idol here) of this
world. Once you have achieved that goal and own all the same tracks in
your hero's top 10, why bother with anything else? With the use of
Ableton, you can even replicate your chosen hero's recent super-smooth
set, track by track.
I think this part is bang-on.
Another factor is that we live in a time-poor world, and having dealt
with work, commuting and all the other menial chores that life
demands, most people have a limited amount of time to source new (or
old) music.
I doubt this makes much difference one way or another. People have always
been busy.
The final factor though is the most important, and I'm
sure many people who read the site will disagree with me, but it seems
like in the constant search for the newest, most upfront music, a
sense of history has gone out the window.
It never fails to amaze me that charts or sets only consist of brand
new music, that there is no attempt to link or connect to the past,
from where this music came. By its nature, electronic music evolves at
a fast pace, but it's still necessary to have an understanding of what
happened in the past to fully appreciate what's going on now. One of
this year's most original albums, 'Restaurant of Assassins', by Neil
Landstrum is heavily inspired by old school rave and 90s bleep bass
techno as well as dubstep and it sounds brilliant, a breath of fresh
air in what I feel is an increasingly conservative, risk-averse techno
landscape.
No one wants to deal with snotty record store assistants, but one
thing that shopping in real-life stores instills is a sense of a
curiosity, to look beyond any given week's new arrivals and to explore
the creaking shelves and dusty crates.
Ten years ago, it was much harder to find great new music: it meant
that people looked harder, went to their local record store a few
times a week, often pre-ordered release, religiously read magazines
for any shred of information about their favourite producer's future
activity and generally behaved like proper trainspotters rather than
sheep with broadband connections.
I'm not suggesting that we return to those bad old days, but the way
things were made people hungry to find new music. Nowadays,that sense
of hunger seems to be largely absent, both in DJ sets and shopping
habits - but I still hope that in 20 year's time, people will be
listening to Ron Trent's 'Altered States' rather than this week's Juno
top 10.
This part I find problematic.
I think that most people reading this know lots of people on the list (and
in person) who do a fine job of playing sets that include a cross section
of the history of music... of course that depends on how deeply cut a slice
of time you consider to be relevant.
But that relativism aside, I think a more pertinent question is: why do
audiences / booking agents / clubs / mix cd listeners / labels tolerate or
encourage filter for DJs who play a narrow style range in a narrow time
period? (This, rather than trying to explain why there isn't anyone to play
that set, because in my opinion there are plenty of people who can & do.)
I'm betting there's an obvious answer, but perhaps it bears mentioning?
m50
