still want to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 11/04/2007 05:55:27 PM:
> >>..Of course pretension and art go hand in hand, but I am > >> tired of the BS. My vision for the radical next step in Techno music > >> -- a re-prioritization that puts all that hokey > >> futuristic/innovation/"newness" crap out of the discourse, that > >> separates the music from the audio theory and scientific > >> delusions/obsessions, that finally makes Techno comfortable to just be > >> music. FFS!! > > Believe it or not I do agree with this sentiment. ..but I just don'tunderstand > why you have to come over and call BS on my side of the court. > > Where is this prevailing fear of the machine coming from? it's prevalent thought-out "techno" music themes - techno, imo, has always had a strong streak of being wary about the dystopian future/present look at it's inspirations - robotics replacing man, Blade Runner and other not so nice future worlds, Detroit (fer fcks sake), Berlin (which wasn't the city it is now), racial inequality, economic inequality, Reaganism & the Cold War, unresolved issues surrounding the Vietnam War, crack & AIDS epidemics, etc. Techno artists didn't originally use the newest synths - they used the ten and fifteen year old models. The cheap, disused models. The machines nobody wanted anymore. > Personally I'm not ready to dump the history of Techno and it's tendency > to indulge in the ideas of Technology just because I might compromise the > sensibilities of people who want to lock the genre into some fixed paradigm. I don't see where, looking at the history of techno, it has a tendency to indulge in the ideas of technology beyond doing what you can with what you have and making it sound funky on a dance floor. I don't think techno is locked into any fixed paradigm either. The fact that Aphex Twin, Derrick May, and Jeff Mills' music can all be translated and performed by orchestral groups proves that it's not locked and it's not about technology. > I don't disagree with the idea of trying to make beautiful Techno inthe style > and methods that we currently understand. There is something very noble > in doing this and I will appreciate the results as much as the next person. > > But are we going to end up like popular Jazz music where artists execute > a series of standards over and over again? This might be okay? No - because popular jazz stagnated but not for a lack of technological advancements. It was a stagnation in the way people felt they could express themselves with the instrument they played. There's a whole world of avant garde jazz music that still uses the same piano, drum, trumpet, saxophone, bass set-up and it sounds nothing like popular jazz music. > My personal idea of Techno is just not locked into a this type of ideology, > > > if you want to study sound waves and how they interact either > > acoustically or electronically, you should do it! it is really > > interesting stuff. my signal processing classes are wonderfully > > entertaining. but it is not music. > > I remember when my friends used to tell me that Techno was not music, it > was load of repetitive machine noise. Soulless faceless bollocks for kids > on drugs. some of it is... :-/ > Perhaps it is a healthy sign that people with in the scene are now telling > other people in the scene that it's no longer music, its just signals in > the machine. (Isn't music theory is a form of signal processing?!) that's a healthy sign? oh dear.... you can't dance to music theory and maybe you should study sculpture instead (or in addition to your music studies) > I thought it was this very aspect that inspired so many Techno artist. > This exploration of the noise in the machine, the soul in the machine, the > fact that you could get this insane groove out of box with buttons on it. No dude - Funkadelic is the inspiration it's not about the box or the process of what you're doing - it's the flipping result! > This process of finding a part of ourselves somehow reflected by in circuitry. > Are we now supposed to stop this? What is a reasonable inspiration for > Techno music? What should Techno artists use to draw out their ideas? Funkadelic and moving bootys on the dance floor. > Here in NZ .. it is most often the landscape. Many of my friends who > produce Techno use the environment around them to find their ideas. It > is the land and nature that becomes the rhythm of the music. > > However there is a relationship through the machines and the systems > that are used to produce the music and the nature that inspires them. > The two elements are not exclusive. > > There is a recognition of the dichotomy between completely natural nature > and completely synthetic music production. > > In an immediate fashion the use to sound systems, sound waves, and ideas > of acoustic engineering are used to extend the expression of landscape. > > The art, the music is in using technology to create a synthesize thelandscape. > > Why? Perhaps to resolve this this disconnection between humans and nature. > To somehow use music and sonic form to draw the human experience back > to nature? Is this music or just science and circuitry? Is it just BS? You want to resolve the disconnection between humans and nature? Take off the headphones, go outside, take a walk. Some blips and bleeps in a nightclub or at a rave isn't going to do it. Nor is a dance floor that creates music based on the dancers' movements. Applying your time and effort toward sustainable energy will do more for resolving any disconnect between humans and nature than sitting in front of a computer or creating a energy hogging sound system. Stop looking for synthesized means of healing any disconnection there may be - it doesn't exist. MEK
