RE: (313) Ellen Allien's New Mix: Opinions?
I'm sure I've heard a BC track in a Carl Craig set before, possibly his own! ;-) ... But no actually I think it was 'Infinition'. Seeing as he's mates with von Oswald co, seems likely, ditto with the CR stuff. As for Hood, there's a well known parting of ways in the tastes between the pair, so neither have probably played each other's records out this side of 2000, I'd guess. -Original Message- From: Paul Kendrick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 04, 2008 4:27 PM To: Toby Frith; kent williams; list 313 Subject: RE: (313) Ellen Allien's New Mix: Opinions? Im shocked to find Carl Craig #1, but he don't play hood or CR records in his set, well not for years if he ever did. -Original Message- From: Toby Frith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 04 April 2008 15:45 To: kent williams; list 313 Subject: RE: (313) Ellen Allien's New Mix: Opinions? The fact that minimal techno is currently seen as hip can only be a good thing. More and more people are into labels like Chain Reaction, M-Plant and Basic Channel than ever before. That ultimately will lead them back to the Detroit originators. It takes time, but I know for one that it has transformed the London techno scene. -Original Message- From: kent williams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 04 April 2008 15:41 To: list 313 Subject: Re: (313) Ellen Allien's New Mix: Opinions? The one mix I have by Ellen Allien is Fabric 34 and I listen to it a lot -- both straight through and when individual tracks come up on shuffle. I think it's high time that we stop using minimal as a dirty word. Minimalism in its broadest sense has been a revolution in music, not so much because it has been revolutionary in content, but because it has demanded a new relationship between the music and the listener. The best minimal techno is every bit as dramatic and emotional as any other sort of dance music. The worst is just boring. Worse than that, it's a sort of music that appeals and encourages an audience of people completely off their faces on drugs. Give me something with a little soul and variety anyday! It's also to separate the music from the scene, and to realize that slagging on a music/scene when it blows up is as much a hipster transgression as following that trend. I was amused last summer walking around Brooklyn 'hipster' neighborhood last summer; it seemed like people who, in my shallow evaluation were, in fact, the dreaded hipsters, were modulating their fashion sense and coiffure to avoid the dreaded hipster signifiers. Being hip is too exhausting for me. You'll always be trying to stay ahead of curve, and nothing but eternal vigilance will keep you from staying with something formerly cutting edge, now declasse'. It's like surfing -- you want to be in the curl without the wave crashing over you. I'm content to like what I like and let someone else sort it out. But I digress. Ellen Allien is usually pretty ace in my estimation. If one of her mixes sounded a little flat at first, I'd give it a few listens to sink in before dismissing it. For all the latest news and comment visit www.telegraph.co.uk. This message, its contents and any attachments to it are private, confidential and may be the subject of legal privilege. Any unauthorised disclosure, use or dissemination of the whole or part of this message (without our prior written consent) is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately. Incoming and outgoing telephone calls to our offices may be monitored or recorded for training and quality control purposes and for confirming orders and information. Telegraph Media Group Limited is a limited liability company registered in England and Wales (company number 451593). Our registered office address is: 111 Buckingham Palace Road, London, SW1W 0DT.
Re: (313) minimal suxs like dub
From DufDuf: ie. minimal is a technique like dub is a technique Disagree. Dub is a genre, Minimal is a genre. Rhythm Sound does not sound like Magda. Yes these things exist along a continuum of sound, but are certainly at fairly distinct ends, with rather pronounced sound differences, regardless of how they are mixed together by a dj. Sure after a certain point we are sometimes splitting hairs, and of course everything bleeds into different areas, but that's part of the fun. People can get a little crazy with categorization, but it's a very useful tool for talking about certain types of music. I can say minimal and people know what I'm talking about for the most part. It might be hard to classify a single track, but I'm quite comfortable using a label to make it easy to discuss a type of sound as a whole. I mean seriously the repetitive complaints I keep hearing about laptop dj's or copy cat stylists .. and references to the same single dubstep producer is wearing me thin. My delete key works just fine on messages I don't want to read. I just don't read posts I'm not interested in. I appreciate your opinions and did find them interesting, but writing in to everyone to say you are tired of hearing a discussion about something while participating in that same discussion is weak sauce. I've been beat up around here before . for saying this, but the music is moving. It's doing new things, in a million different ways. I'd say there's plenty new in the performance side of things, but things aren't moving all that fast on the music-writing side. The technical ability to spit out a track on ableton in a few hours doesn't mean it's going to be any good. I honestly can't tell any more the difference between house, techno, techhouse, detriot, minimal or any other genre you might want to mention. Splitting hairs again. I don't think it matters at all how you classify one piece of music, but people like to generalize in order to make things easier for large groups of music. There's just too much music out there. You have to know what area of the dartboard to shoot for in order to narrow it down to find stuff you like. That, or find people whose taste you trust in order to suggest things. I've found that people on this list for example, generally like the same kinds of things I like, so I don't care if they call it X genre, it gets the benefit of the doubt. And for the most part when people suggest music on here, I don't really hear any discussion at all about genres. It's 'check out this track' or 'check out this mix.' and I think that's fine enough for most. The current era of music can mean everyone is a producer in their bedroom. So what I think we are hearing is people using the same sort of production techniques across similar tempo's and styles of music. It's always been that way, with whatever the current medium/techniques are. Tape edits to laptops, most people putting out tracks were/are always using the same sorts of tools at the same time. I just think we might get more life out of electronic music if we start to look at some of the processes going on as the use of techniques as opposed to genreification followed by quick dismissal. I've got no problem genre-fying something that I think is mostly terrible (or excellent). It's my opinion. Classifying a group of music that sounds similar is perfectly valid if you are trying to express your opinion. No, I haven't listened to every 2-step record out there, but I can comfortably say that I'm not that interested in that music as a whole. No, I haven't listened to every minimal record out there, but I've heard enough (and certainly bought a few), to know it's not something I'm interested in either. Currently I am enjoying the sounds classified as minimal because they provide a group of tracks that enable me to play sets that contain a lot of spatial texture. Rock on. The use of reverbs, delays, stripped out melody modes and monotonic rhythms enable out board sample layering and the use of off beats on the other deck to construct the type of sets I have wanted too for years. Well I guess that is the good thing about most minimal records, you can put 4 of them on at the same time and not really notice it, it does give you a lot of room. I'll give you that it can certainly make for a lot of fun mixer work. Lets face it every Dj wants to be producer with out having to do the hard work in the studio. No. And from FBK: What would make me happy is a bit of funk coming back into the sound...or at least the acknowledgement of the groove. The electronic holy grail is really whatever you want-for me it's to have the music I love not all sound like it's coming out of the same three boxes from four people. Very well put. -Arturo
(313) Anyone Still Listen To Sonic Sunset?
To balance out some of my recent negativity, I'll link to some of my favorite all-time music, ever. http://www.sonicsunset.com/ For those of you who aren't familiar, Sonic Sunset was a long-running radio show here in Chicago that featured some amazing music for many years. Expect deep new sounds alongside timeless classics - from techno, electro, detroit/chicago house, underground disco machine funk and weird nu-wave / italo / funk / soul dusties that slipped through the cracks of time (and fell onto our turntables). I have yet to find two people with better music taste, as far as I'm concerned. Just scroll down the main page for a few minutes and review the tracklists for most of the shows. You've got everything from Funk/Soul music to Japan to Kraftwerk to Atkins. It really is good stuff. The shows usually run along a theme, so you might have a Larry Heard special or B12 records special, but it's always good stuff. Anyway it's brought me many hours of good listening, hope it does for some of you who aren't familiar with it as well. -Arturo
(313) contemporary academic music literature?
i recently read this book http://www.amazon.com/This-Your-Brain-Music-Obsession/dp/0525949690 and enjoyed it quite a bit, but ideally i'm looking for something that's a bit less rock and a bit more techno. can anybody recommend any contemporary (21st century) academic-level critical writing and/or research on electronic music (or music in general) that is worth reading? as an example, i've been meaning to read this piece that martin posted a few months ago: http://folk.uio.no/hanst/Manchester/ChicagoHouse.htm not as interested in the cultural or historical aspects either (ala love saves the day and last night a dj saved my life, both of which i've read), but feel free to share if something is extraordinary. please no commentary from those who think music can't/shouldn't be discussed scientifically. :) -- peace, frank dj mix archive: http://www.deejaycountzero.com
Re: (313) contemporary academic music literature?
Hi Frank, haven't read these DJ Spooky books yet but here's the link http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/author/default.asp?aid=20608 any other books that discuss music perception ? davor. On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 8:52 AM, Frank Glazer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: i recently read this book http://www.amazon.com/This-Your-Brain-Music-Obsession/dp/0525949690 and enjoyed it quite a bit, but ideally i'm looking for something that's a bit less rock and a bit more techno. can anybody recommend any contemporary (21st century) academic-level critical writing and/or research on electronic music (or music in general) that is worth reading? as an example, i've been meaning to read this piece that martin posted a few months ago: http://folk.uio.no/hanst/Manchester/ChicagoHouse.htm not as interested in the cultural or historical aspects either (ala love saves the day and last night a dj saved my life, both of which i've read), but feel free to share if something is extraordinary. please no commentary from those who think music can't/shouldn't be discussed scientifically. :) -- peace, frank dj mix archive: http://www.deejaycountzero.com
Re: (313) Chill Out Rooms
On 7 Apr 2008, at 03:36, Southern Outpost wrote: Can't forget the KLF Chill Out, one of my favourites back in the day. Yeah, that's a fine album, how they got away with all those samples is a miracle. Great for driving home from a club. m
Re: (313) contemporary academic music literature?
Have you checked out the lengthy list of books, articles etc. here? http://www.dancecult.net/bibliography.php Includes material published right up to 2007. BTW, there's a reference to: May, Beverly. 2006. Techno. In African American Music: An Introduction, edited by Mellonee V. Burnim and Portia K. Maultsby. New York: Routledge, 313-352. Would love to read this chapter some time, as Beverley May did some good, incisive writing on Detroit techno in the 90s. Cheers, Wes -- http://www.myspace.com/westonprince On 4/7/08 6:52 PM, Frank Glazer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: i recently read this book http://www.amazon.com/This-Your-Brain-Music-Obsession/dp/0525949690 and enjoyed it quite a bit, but ideally i'm looking for something that's a bit less rock and a bit more techno. can anybody recommend any contemporary (21st century) academic-level critical writing and/or research on electronic music (or music in general) that is worth reading? as an example, i've been meaning to read this piece that martin posted a few months ago: http://folk.uio.no/hanst/Manchester/ChicagoHouse.htm not as interested in the cultural or historical aspects either (ala love saves the day and last night a dj saved my life, both of which i've read), but feel free to share if something is extraordinary. please no commentary from those who think music can't/shouldn't be discussed scientifically. :)
Re: (313) Anyone Still Listen To Sonic Sunset?
Arturo Lopez wrote: To balance out some of my recent negativity, I'll link to some of my favorite all-time music, ever. http://www.sonicsunset.com/ For those of you who aren't familiar, Sonic Sunset was a long-running radio show here in Chicago that featured some amazing music for many years. Expect deep new sounds alongside timeless classics - from techno, electro, detroit/chicago house, underground disco machine funk and weird nu-wave / italo / funk / soul dusties that slipped through the cracks of time (and fell onto our turntables). I have yet to find two people with better music taste, as far as I'm concerned. Just scroll down the main page for a few minutes and review the tracklists for most of the shows. You've got everything from Funk/Soul music to Japan to Kraftwerk to Atkins. It really is good stuff. The shows usually run along a theme, so you might have a Larry Heard special or B12 records special, but it's always good stuff. Anyway it's brought me many hours of good listening, hope it does for some of you who aren't familiar with it as well. -Arturo Hi, Arturo. Another listener here. Yes, Matt and Dave did an awesome job with the show. Great that the archives are still accessible. Take care. Andrew -- sound/music/DJ courses I teach: http://andrew-duke.com/course.html Chain Reaction downloadable samplepack: http://www.audiobase.com/product/SACR Andrew Duke--Consumer vs. User album: http://www.phthalo.com/cat.php?cat=phth40 artist features column: http://cognitionaudioworks.com/read.html http://myspace.com/andrewduke http://myspace.com/cognitionaudioworks
Re: (313) derrick may rarities
On Jan 28, 2008, at 5:31 PM, Matt Kane's Brain wrote: Fine citizens, I am doing the Test Pattern thing I did with Ken Ishii in November, where I pick an artist to play for an hour. Instead of picking an artist whose records comprise significant sections of my collection, I decided to pick one that's not so easy for me, but maybe easy for you guys: Derrick May! All right, I bought the ones that I could find and afford. :) I'll be playing them on this Friday, April 11th, at 6PM Eastern US time. If you're in the Boston area, tune in at 90.3 FM. If not, listen at www.wzbc.org . I will be recording, so you may decide not to listen at all! -- matt kane's brain http://hydrogenproject.com aim - mkbatwerk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(313) techno vs technique
This seems to come up a lot -- people complaining about laptop performers, software-based production, etc. This is where the dub vs mnml thread seemed to be going. I don't want to start another debate, or another repetition of the same people launching the same mortars over the wall at each other, but I want to say this (perhaps again): 1. Judge the results, not the technique. 2. The theoretical 'futurism' of techno would almost demand embracing of new technology. 3. You can make crappy dance music with a 909, 808, 303, SH101 and a MPC60 too. You're just out $10k more on hardware than you would be with your laptop and cracked copy of fruity loops. 4. Why give people points for making virtue of a necessity, if the results don't measure up?
Re: (313) contemporary academic music literature?
Frank, the best book i read, in years, embracing modern and contemporary music with no genre limits is called Audio Culture. I guess it will please your demands: http://www.amazon.com/Audio-Culture-Readings-Modern-Music/dp/ 0826416152/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8s=booksqid=1207582989sr=1-1 Kw On 07/04/2008, at 03:52, Frank Glazer wrote: i recently read this book http://www.amazon.com/This-Your-Brain-Music-Obsession/dp/0525949690 and enjoyed it quite a bit, but ideally i'm looking for something that's a bit less rock and a bit more techno. can anybody recommend any contemporary (21st century) academic-level critical writing and/or research on electronic music (or music in general) that is worth reading? as an example, i've been meaning to read this piece that martin posted a few months ago: http://folk.uio.no/hanst/Manchester/ChicagoHouse.htm not as interested in the cultural or historical aspects either (ala love saves the day and last night a dj saved my life, both of which i've read), but feel free to share if something is extraordinary. please no commentary from those who think music can't/shouldn't be discussed scientifically. :) -- peace, frank dj mix archive: http://www.deejaycountzero.com
Re: (313) Sebastien Leger's Jaguar
I think the point Christopher was making is that in Beatport it says Original Mix which would be a bit misleading since it is a cover of the *original* and that there isn't any mention or acknowledment of UR MEK Cyclone Wehner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 04/05/2008 07:57:04 PM: It's a cover. Cyclone Wehner Urban/Dance Music Journalist [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 06/04/2008, at 3:10 AM, Christopher O'Grady wrote: Sebastien Leger - Jaguar (Original Mix) is #1 on beatport... *Original Mix ? UR is not mentioned. The artist field only shows Mr. Leger. *Scratches chin* __ __ Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
Re: (313) minimal suxs like dub
Arturo,i think both minimal and dub are named genres, but, above that, minimal and dub are techniques, methods of music production. You can hear minimal not only in techno, you can hear it in the philip glass music, in some post-punk bands, steve reich music, and in many areas of academic/modern music. Minimal is the way of the synthetic, the reducing, the way of the minimal elements necessary for certain expression due to intensify that expression or leave the receptor totally in charge of the interpretation. Dub is style of reggae, yes, but it's a studio technique before that. The use of effects, the focus on the process, the concept of remixing, the producer turning into a composer instead of a simple engineer. Dub techniques are responsable for a revolution in the music production aesthetics. You can see dub versions from Carl Craig songs, Hi-hop songs, Madonna songs, Stevie Wonder songs, etc etc etc. When you have music made in layers, you have dub. Kw On 07/04/2008, at 03:38, Arturo Lopez wrote: From DufDuf: ie. minimal is a technique like dub is a technique Disagree. Dub is a genre, Minimal is a genre. Rhythm Sound does not sound like Magda. Yes these things exist along a continuum of sound, but are certainly at fairly distinct ends, with rather pronounced sound differences, regardless of how they are mixed together by a dj. Sure after a certain point we are sometimes splitting hairs, and of course everything bleeds into different areas, but that's part of the fun. People can get a little crazy with categorization, but it's a very useful tool for talking about certain types of music. I can say minimal and people know what I'm talking about for the most part. It might be hard to classify a single track, but I'm quite comfortable using a label to make it easy to discuss a type of sound as a whole. I mean seriously the repetitive complaints I keep hearing about laptop dj's or copy cat stylists .. and references to the same single dubstep producer is wearing me thin. My delete key works just fine on messages I don't want to read. I just don't read posts I'm not interested in. I appreciate your opinions and did find them interesting, but writing in to everyone to say you are tired of hearing a discussion about something while participating in that same discussion is weak sauce. I've been beat up around here before . for saying this, but the music is moving. It's doing new things, in a million different ways. I'd say there's plenty new in the performance side of things, but things aren't moving all that fast on the music-writing side. The technical ability to spit out a track on ableton in a few hours doesn't mean it's going to be any good. I honestly can't tell any more the difference between house, techno, techhouse, detriot, minimal or any other genre you might want to mention. Splitting hairs again. I don't think it matters at all how you classify one piece of music, but people like to generalize in order to make things easier for large groups of music. There's just too much music out there. You have to know what area of the dartboard to shoot for in order to narrow it down to find stuff you like. That, or find people whose taste you trust in order to suggest things. I've found that people on this list for example, generally like the same kinds of things I like, so I don't care if they call it X genre, it gets the benefit of the doubt. And for the most part when people suggest music on here, I don't really hear any discussion at all about genres. It's 'check out this track' or 'check out this mix.' and I think that's fine enough for most. The current era of music can mean everyone is a producer in their bedroom. So what I think we are hearing is people using the same sort of production techniques across similar tempo's and styles of music. It's always been that way, with whatever the current medium/techniques are. Tape edits to laptops, most people putting out tracks were/are always using the same sorts of tools at the same time. I just think we might get more life out of electronic music if we start to look at some of the processes going on as the use of techniques as opposed to genreification followed by quick dismissal. I've got no problem genre-fying something that I think is mostly terrible (or excellent). It's my opinion. Classifying a group of music that sounds similar is perfectly valid if you are trying to express your opinion. No, I haven't listened to every 2-step record out there, but I can comfortably say that I'm not that interested in that music as a whole. No, I haven't listened to every minimal record out there, but I've heard enough (and certainly bought a few), to know it's not something I'm interested in either. Currently I am enjoying the sounds classified as minimal because they provide a group of tracks that enable me to play sets that contain a lot of spatial texture. Rock on. The use of reverbs, delays, stripped out melody
Re: (313) techno vs technique
Well said Kent! Last couple of years i saw so many of there debates, debates whether or not techno with only a laptop is bad techno, analogue synthesis is the way. The thing is that when this whole thing started i had to do exactly the same discussion but then the thing we had to fight about was when 'traditional musicians' claimed electronic was not real. I recently had a similar debate with a DJ who claimed that people dj- ing with Live or with that M-Audio Torq system ain't real DJ's. In the end it turns out that most of these discussions are all based on fear or a form of jealousy. I have a studio with a bunch of old analogue synths and i see people playing out with only a laptop, and that laptop is there whole studio to. When is started making electronic music i had to save up a lot of money to get something simple started, these young kids can do the same with a lot less money. All these discussions are based on feelings described above, in most cases they have no musical content and if there is one it is mainly that for example the old rock people simply did not like the sound of a TB-303. On 7 apr 2008, at 15:36, kent williams wrote: This seems to come up a lot -- people complaining about laptop performers, software-based production, etc. This is where the dub vs mnml thread seemed to be going. I don't want to start another debate, or another repetition of the same people launching the same mortars over the wall at each other, but I want to say this (perhaps again): 1. Judge the results, not the technique. 2. The theoretical 'futurism' of techno would almost demand embracing of new technology. 3. You can make crappy dance music with a 909, 808, 303, SH101 and a MPC60 too. You're just out $10k more on hardware than you would be with your laptop and cracked copy of fruity loops. 4. Why give people points for making virtue of a necessity, if the results don't measure up?
Re: (313) techno vs technique
Totally agree. But there will always be people feeling hurted by the ones who disturb their own status quo. The thing repeats on and on and on. A 70 year old rich guy claims that popular music is not music, an 50 year old claims that music played by guitar bands is real music, and music played by pushing buttons and running machines is not music, a young fresh guy, who already heard all this sh*t, claims that music made by pushing buttons and running machines is real music and the onde made in a computer is not. It's like a generations disease! That reminds me of that classic situation at work – new guy arrives doing things, shifting things up, but the olds guys wanna put him down cause they don't wanna work hard, they don't wanna keep up or run the risk of loosing whatever they already have. Kw On 07/04/2008, at 10:36, kent williams wrote: This seems to come up a lot -- people complaining about laptop performers, software-based production, etc. This is where the dub vs mnml thread seemed to be going. I don't want to start another debate, or another repetition of the same people launching the same mortars over the wall at each other, but I want to say this (perhaps again): 1. Judge the results, not the technique. 2. The theoretical 'futurism' of techno would almost demand embracing of new technology. 3. You can make crappy dance music with a 909, 808, 303, SH101 and a MPC60 too. You're just out $10k more on hardware than you would be with your laptop and cracked copy of fruity loops. 4. Why give people points for making virtue of a necessity, if the results don't measure up?
Re: (313) Sebastien Leger's Jaguar
Beatport classifies all versions of a song as an original mix, unless there's a remix of that particular song. Since it's a cover; it's considered the Original mix. +odd -- On Apr 7, 2008, at 11:51 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think the point Christopher was making is that in Beatport it says Original Mix which would be a bit misleading since it is a cover of the *original* and that there isn't any mention or acknowledment of UR MEK Cyclone Wehner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 04/05/2008 07:57:04 PM: It's a cover. Cyclone Wehner Urban/Dance Music Journalist [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 06/04/2008, at 3:10 AM, Christopher O'Grady wrote: Sebastien Leger - Jaguar (Original Mix) is #1 on beatport... *Original Mix ? UR is not mentioned. The artist field only shows Mr. Leger. *Scratches chin* __ __ Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php? category=shopping
Re: (313) techno vs technique
What do you base this comment on, just your own experience or a wider view? As a primarily (but not solely) hardware producer I certainly don't agree with that statement - I neither fear nor am jealous or even smug about laptop producers, I simply prefer making music with hardware. Yes, it took money and time to build up a decent studio, but that's half the fun of it. It's just a different way of working... Whilst I fundamentally agree also that the end product is the most important thing, there cannot be any question that the methods used dramatically alter the outcome. It's a matter of taste which you prefer, but there is no doubt that differing production techniques and equipment result in a different sound... Not only from the point of sound generation (which is becoming less obvious as soft synths etc become ever more elegant) but also the interface and approach that the differing techniques force upon the musician. There are things that you can do with a computer that would be very difficult to do with hardware and vice versa... i don't think you can do exactly the same thing with each at all.. Klaas-Jan Jongsma wrote: In the end it turns out that most of these discussions are all based on fear or a form of jealousy. I have a studio with a bunch of old analogue synths and i see people playing out with only a laptop, and that laptop is there whole studio to. When is started making electronic music i had to save up a lot of money to get something simple started, these young kids can do the same with a lot less money. -- *matt chester 11th hour recordings* www.myspace.com/mattchester1 www.myspace.com/11thhourrecordings www.virb.com/mattchester www.11-hour.com
Re: (313) contemporary academic music literature?
Have you read Oliver Sacks book (saw it's paired with the one you posted) Musicophilia? http://www.amazon.com/Musicophilia-Tales-Music-Oliver-Sacks/dp/1400040817/ref=pd_bxgy_b_text_b talks about music and sound from a perspective of neurological disorders not really academic-level but fascinating all the same not about techno but the applications to it should be obvious African Rhythm and African Sensibility: Aesthetics and Social Action in African Musical Idioms by John Miller Chernoff http://www.amazon.com/African-Rhythm-Sensibility-Aesthetics-Musical/dp/0226103455/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8s=booksqid=1207585721sr=1-1 well, that's more anthropological actually but it's a great read better still if you can actually read some notation (which I can't very well but still found it to be a great book) MEK Frank Glazer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 04/07/2008 01:52:31 AM: i recently read this book http://www.amazon.com/This-Your-Brain-Music-Obsession/dp/0525949690 and enjoyed it quite a bit, but ideally i'm looking for something that's a bit less rock and a bit more techno. can anybody recommend any contemporary (21st century) academic-level critical writing and/or research on electronic music (or music in general) that is worth reading? as an example, i've been meaning to read this piece that martin posted a few months ago: http://folk.uio.no/hanst/Manchester/ChicagoHouse.htm not as interested in the cultural or historical aspects either (ala love saves the day and last night a dj saved my life, both of which i've read), but feel free to share if something is extraordinary. please no commentary from those who think music can't/shouldn't be discussed scientifically. :) -- peace, frank dj mix archive: http://www.deejaycountzero.com
(313) Vinyl meltdown
Odd question (and I can't remember if I asked it before on here): Was it just Trax (and presumably a few other similar shady ops back then) that used to melt old records down for new pressings? Or is (was) this common practice? I ask as 1. I have a cupboard full of an overrun on a 12 from years ago that I need to chuck out. I'm big on recycling and would love it if the plastic could live again (hopefully with something much better stamped on) rather than just putting them out for dumping. 2. Having started to think about it I'm curious as to any history anyone knows on this practise anyway.
Re: (313) Vinyl meltdown
I'd also be keen to find out more about this. I have 6 boxes of records sitting in Berlin that are too expensive to ship to the US and i'd prefer to recycle those suckers :) On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 10:11 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Odd question (and I can't remember if I asked it before on here): Was it just Trax (and presumably a few other similar shady ops back then) that used to melt old records down for new pressings? Or is (was) this common practice? I ask as 1. I have a cupboard full of an overrun on a 12 from years ago that I need to chuck out. I'm big on recycling and would love it if the plastic could live again (hopefully with something much better stamped on) rather than just putting them out for dumping. 2. Having started to think about it I'm curious as to any history anyone knows on this practise anyway. -- -- Southern Outpost Sydney - San Francisco - Berlin http://www.southernoutpost.com --
Re: (313) Vinyl meltdown
give them to someone crafty http://www.eco-artware.com/catalog/MMM2-album-bracelet.php MEK [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 04/07/2008 12:14:11 PM: I'd also be keen to find out more about this. I have 6 boxes of records sitting in Berlin that are too expensive to ship to the US and i'd prefer to recycle those suckers :) On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 10:11 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Odd question (and I can't remember if I asked it before on here): Was it just Trax (and presumably a few other similar shady ops back then) that used to melt old records down for new pressings? Or is (was) this common practice? I ask as 1. I have a cupboard full of an overrun on a 12 from years ago that I need to chuck out. I'm big on recycling and would love it if the plastic could live again (hopefully with something much better stamped on) rather than just putting them out for dumping. 2. Having started to think about it I'm curious as to any history anyone knows on this practise anyway. -- -- Southern Outpost Sydney - San Francisco - Berlin http://www.southernoutpost.com --
RE: (313) Vinyl meltdown
Yeah but that record's rubbish and it's got my name on the label so there's no way I want that being seen around! From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 07 April 2008 18:32 give them to someone crafty http://www.eco-artware.com/catalog/MMM2-album-bracelet.php
Re: (313) Vinyl meltdown
In Brazil, when vinyl was still printed over here, we could find two methods of vinyl recycling in the market - both were anti-ethical and practiced by the mainstream music industry. One was the recycling by melting broken, defective or unsold records. So, when people wanted their records printed on virgin good quality vinyl, they had to ask for coloured vinyl. The other consisted in the scrapping of the groove surface of unsold records and reprinting over. The result: thin records with crappy sound. Sometimes we could hear the sound of the old groove in the gaps, like the sound of a distant baddly tunned radio station. I don't think the shrinking printing industry is looking for recycled vinyl, once they have to maintain the quality of the sound to stay alive. Maybe there's some new technique that makes recycled vinyl sounds as good as virgin vinyl – wich would be a good thing. Unapropriate disposal of vinyl can cause a lot of damage. Kw On 07/04/2008, at 14:11, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Odd question (and I can't remember if I asked it before on here): Was it just Trax (and presumably a few other similar shady ops back then) that used to melt old records down for new pressings? Or is (was) this common practice? I ask as 1. I have a cupboard full of an overrun on a 12 from years ago that I need to chuck out. I'm big on recycling and would love it if the plastic could live again (hopefully with something much better stamped on) rather than just putting them out for dumping. 2. Having started to think about it I'm curious as to any history anyone knows on this practise anyway.
Re: (313) Vinyl meltdown
Damn! :) But i hate people making watches from records to hang in their walls. I saw one made of Another Green World the other day. Of course, the owner had no clue about the music on it. What a waste. On 07/04/2008, at 14:32, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: give them to someone crafty http://www.eco-artware.com/catalog/MMM2-album-bracelet.php MEK [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 04/07/2008 12:14:11 PM: I'd also be keen to find out more about this. I have 6 boxes of records sitting in Berlin that are too expensive to ship to the US and i'd prefer to recycle those suckers :) On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 10:11 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Odd question (and I can't remember if I asked it before on here): Was it just Trax (and presumably a few other similar shady ops back then) that used to melt old records down for new pressings? Or is (was) this common practice? I ask as 1. I have a cupboard full of an overrun on a 12 from years ago that I need to chuck out. I'm big on recycling and would love it if the plastic could live again (hopefully with something much better stamped on) rather than just putting them out for dumping. 2. Having started to think about it I'm curious as to any history anyone knows on this practise anyway. -- -- Southern Outpost Sydney - San Francisco - Berlin http://www.southernoutpost.com --
Re: (313) techno vs technique
I think it often boils down to the coolness factor amongst haters on forums, clapping each ones shoulder plus the notorious my dick is longer than yours boogie. From my experience, above are valid in ~90% of such discussions. Why give people points for making virtue of a necessity, if the results don't measure up?
Re: (313) Vinyl meltdown
Old ghosts hidden in the gaps. What an interesting concept! Antonio On Apr 7, 2008, at 6:44 PM, Kowalsky wrote: The result: thin records with crappy sound. Sometimes we could hear the sound of the old groove in the gaps, like the sound of a distant baddly tunned radio station. Kw
Re: (313) minimal suxs like dub
Good points, Kw. I guess I was focusing more on the classification stuff. You are certainly right about those words being used to describe an approach to production. I guess I'm also drawing my own imaginary line between the sort of disciplined minimal approach t o production you describe versus the sort of minimal that's trendy nowadays. Here's samples of something from I. A. Bericochea, which I think is pretty good minimal. http://www.iabericochea.com/A.mp3 and http://www.iabericochea.com/rojo.mp3 I'd consider that very different than the stuff they are playing in Berlin, even if those samples are from Minus releases (hehe). Arturo Arturo,i think both minimal and dub are named genres, but, above that, minimal and dub are techniques, methods of music production. You can hear minimal not only in techno, you can hear it in the philip glass music, in some post-punk bands, steve reich music, and in many areas of academic/modern music. Minimal is the way of the synthetic, the reducing, the way of the minimal elements necessary for certain expression due to intensify that expression or leave the receptor totally in charge of the interpretation. Dub is style of reggae, yes, but it's a studio technique before that. The use of effects, the focus on the process, the concept of remixing, the producer turning into a composer instead of a simple engineer. Dub techniques are responsable for a revolution in the music production aesthetics. You can see dub versions from Carl Craig songs, Hi-hop songs, Madonna songs, Stevie Wonder songs, etc etc etc. When you have music made in layers, you have dub. Kw
Re: (313) Vinyl meltdown
Well, if you put this way... Carlos Gardel voice buried under Cartola's tunes. :-) People used to laugh at parties, when through that dry beat instrumental track or something alike, in a very loud soundsystem, we could hear something like the voice of Barry Manillow. On 07/04/2008, at 14:56, António Alves wrote: Old ghosts hidden in the gaps. What an interesting concept! Antonio On Apr 7, 2008, at 6:44 PM, Kowalsky wrote: The result: thin records with crappy sound. Sometimes we could hear the sound of the old groove in the gaps, like the sound of a distant baddly tunned radio station. Kw
Re: (313) techno vs technique
Oh don't get me wrong, i don think there is anything wrong with having a preference on making music with hardware or software or a mix. My point was simply that most of the discussion i had with people about if music made equipment Z or by workflow Y is based on some form of jealousy or fear. I personally have a mix of both worlds in my studio. My statement is based on personal experiences, something i noticed when i had these rather pointless discussions on what was real music. It wasn't based on some form of science/facts. The discussions on itself is pointless because it can only be held if we could exactly tell scientifically what would be music and what not. These discussions are based on personal feelings about what would be the right way to make music. It is a personal preference yet most people try to reason about it with other people on scientific level. So we personal/emotional choice about music and we defend it scientific facts. KJ On 7 apr 2008, at 18:19, Matt Chester wrote: What do you base this comment on, just your own experience or a wider view? As a primarily (but not solely) hardware producer I certainly don't agree with that statement - I neither fear nor am jealous or even smug about laptop producers, I simply prefer making music with hardware. Yes, it took money and time to build up a decent studio, but that's half the fun of it. It's just a different way of working... Whilst I fundamentally agree also that the end product is the most important thing, there cannot be any question that the methods used dramatically alter the outcome. It's a matter of taste which you prefer, but there is no doubt that differing production techniques and equipment result in a different sound... Not only from the point of sound generation (which is becoming less obvious as soft synths etc become ever more elegant) but also the interface and approach that the differing techniques force upon the musician. There are things that you can do with a computer that would be very difficult to do with hardware and vice versa... i don't think you can do exactly the same thing with each at all.. Klaas-Jan Jongsma wrote: In the end it turns out that most of these discussions are all based on fear or a form of jealousy. I have a studio with a bunch of old analogue synths and i see people playing out with only a laptop, and that laptop is there whole studio to. When is started making electronic music i had to save up a lot of money to get something simple started, these young kids can do the same with a lot less money. -- *matt chester 11th hour recordings* www.myspace.com/mattchester1 www.myspace.com/11thhourrecordings www.virb.com/mattchester www.11-hour.com
Re: (313) techno vs technique
kent williams a écrit : This seems to come up a lot -- people complaining about laptop performers, software-based production, etc. This is where the dub vs mnml thread seemed to be going. I don't want to start another debate, or another repetition of the same people launching the same mortars over the wall at each other, but I want to say this (perhaps again): 1. Judge the results, not the technique. 2. The theoretical 'futurism' of techno would almost demand embracing of new technology. 3. You can make crappy dance music with a 909, 808, 303, SH101 and a MPC60 too. You're just out $10k more on hardware than you would be with your laptop and cracked copy of fruity loops. 4. Why give people points for making virtue of a necessity, if the results don't measure up? The so called futurism of techno is debatable. I just wish for good and ambitious music whether it is futuristic or not. My main problem right now is the flood of crappy music generated by the fact the barrier of entry to make music is lower than in the hardware era. Random Joe makes a loop, add random sounds, and voila: instant track that goes knowhere that might find a label since it's so easy to release digitally. Listening sequentially to listings of beatport or juno is a painful experience My other concern is that a lot of those new producers follow a formula, wheter it's mnml, house, etc where the composition of their track is s predictable. It's boring too tears. Even some tracks considered super good by most of the people of this list can enter the predictable, and does not bring anything new to the table even if a little category. These days I prefer music that push things forward a bit, whether it's from Digitonal, Jacen Solo or Matt Chester (hi Matt!) for example. After all those years, I have less and less patience for music that just replicates a formula, as well produced as it is.
Re: (313) techno vs technique
1. Judge the results, not the technique. Totally true, why it's so important what is used if the result is good/right and deserves the title of 'art' or offers the music to go further. If an artist records good music using a pure hardware analog modular and another one NI Reaktor (for example). Does the one using Reaktor is less interesting ? 2. The theoretical 'futurism' of techno would almost demand embracing of new technology. Definitely agree, it's the way this music was created at first and now, some would ask to stay close to the old and almost dead 'way to do' ? Artists have today so much tools in hands and half of them just try to copy what was done near (more?...) 20 years ago. 3. You can make crappy dance music with a 909, 808, 303, SH101 and a MPC60 too. You're just out $10k more on hardware than you would be with your laptop and cracked copy of fruity loops. On a personal opinion, it's why there is so much bad copies of the D sound actually. Guys buying gear because 'names' use it and do all and nothing with it claiming they do 'the sound inspired' by Detroit. And it's not limited to Detroit, Chicago sound ... New York sound ... 4. Why give people points for making virtue of a necessity, if the results don't measure up? Again, In My Opinion, because too much hypocrisy. Some peoples say an artist is f*g good just because he use gear they can't afford. Look at Buchla synths owners, except a few, lot of those who own it records boring noises that can be done on a old Atari or with any VST freeware. Just a few know how to use it and program it really since it is a very complex synthesizer. But, do some 'google' search and you'll find lot of peoples loving these noises just because the man behind own one of these rare synths. Ok, ok, I take the door and go out with my dog :-) PEACE -- Dimitri Pike http://wildtek.free.fr http://www.myspace.com/wildtek
Re: (313) techno vs technique
Frank Glazer a écrit : My main problem right now is the flood of crappy music generated by the fact the barrier of entry to make music is lower than in the hardware era. Random Joe makes a loop, add random sounds, and voila: instant track that goes knowhere that might find a label since it's so easy to release digitally. Listening sequentially to listings of beatport or juno is a painful experience i hear this argument a lot and i think it's rubbish. i'm sure industry people were saying the same thing when chicagoans started belting out drum tracks on (then) cheap roland boxes in the early 80s, but that turned out pretty good, i'd say. think of it this way, you could just as easily go back in time and imagine similar things being said, like this: the fact the barrier of entry to make music is lower than in the symphonic era/big band era/rock n roll quartet era/arena rock era. technology always changes and expands the possibilities for music, both good and bad. if you don't like the bad, don't support it. pretty simple equation. The good news with the easy access to making music is that in all those new producers a few outstanding ones will emerge. So there's still hope for great music and advancing technolgy heh :)
Re: (313) techno vs technique
Lest we forget, how many absolutely sh1t records were put out in Chicago and Detroit in the late 80s/early 90s 'golden age' of techno and house? We tend to forget the crap, and eventually it's all ground up and Archer uses it again. On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 2:24 PM, Michael Pujos [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Frank Glazer a écrit : My main problem right now is the flood of crappy music generated by the fact the barrier of entry to make music is lower than in the hardware era. Random Joe makes a loop, add random sounds, and voila: instant track that goes knowhere that might find a label since it's so easy to release digitally. Listening sequentially to listings of beatport or juno is a painful experience i hear this argument a lot and i think it's rubbish. i'm sure industry people were saying the same thing when chicagoans started belting out drum tracks on (then) cheap roland boxes in the early 80s, but that turned out pretty good, i'd say. think of it this way, you could just as easily go back in time and imagine similar things being said, like this: the fact the barrier of entry to make music is lower than in the symphonic era/big band era/rock n roll quartet era/arena rock era. technology always changes and expands the possibilities for music, both good and bad. if you don't like the bad, don't support it. pretty simple equation. The good news with the easy access to making music is that in all those new producers a few outstanding ones will emerge. So there's still hope for great music and advancing technolgy heh :)
Re: (313) techno vs technique
AND/OR the crap gets dug up and sold for DOLLAZ as SUPER RARE CHICAGO ACID HOUSE TEST PRE on Discogs/Ebay/Gemm On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 3:43 PM, kent williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lest we forget, how many absolutely sh1t records were put out in Chicago and Detroit in the late 80s/early 90s 'golden age' of techno and house? We tend to forget the crap, and eventually it's all ground up and Archer uses it again. On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 2:24 PM, Michael Pujos [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Frank Glazer a écrit : My main problem right now is the flood of crappy music generated by the fact the barrier of entry to make music is lower than in the hardware era. Random Joe makes a loop, add random sounds, and voila: instant track that goes knowhere that might find a label since it's so easy to release digitally. Listening sequentially to listings of beatport or juno is a painful experience i hear this argument a lot and i think it's rubbish. i'm sure industry people were saying the same thing when chicagoans started belting out drum tracks on (then) cheap roland boxes in the early 80s, but that turned out pretty good, i'd say. think of it this way, you could just as easily go back in time and imagine similar things being said, like this: the fact the barrier of entry to make music is lower than in the symphonic era/big band era/rock n roll quartet era/arena rock era. technology always changes and expands the possibilities for music, both good and bad. if you don't like the bad, don't support it. pretty simple equation. The good news with the easy access to making music is that in all those new producers a few outstanding ones will emerge. So there's still hope for great music and advancing technolgy heh :) -- peace, frank dj mix archive: http://www.deejaycountzero.com
Re: (313) techno vs technique
Well, it _is_ SUPER RARE, you gotta give 'em that... :) On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 2:45 PM, Frank Glazer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: AND/OR the crap gets dug up and sold for DOLLAZ as SUPER RARE CHICAGO ACID HOUSE TEST PRE on Discogs/Ebay/Gemm
Re: (313) techno vs technique
Michael, when small bass/drums/guitar combos came out, people said the same thing: now anyone can do music and it's gonna be crappy. When producers didn't have to learn musical theory or music notation to make music, people said the same thing. Probably, people said the same thing when Guttenberg came out with mobile typography in the XV century: now everyone will be able to read and write and print any crap they like. Can't you see that the loop is the fact that people tend to be conservative when facing changes? Changes for me are exciting. And we're privileged to live years of such revolutionary changes. Y'all know what i mean. The formulaic thing... We work in two ways here. In one way, formulas built the styles, the genres. It comes the expression of many, of a society or a community. It's important. Like american soul music and the fight for the civil rights. It has its beauty integrated to a social factor - its indivisible. In other way, a composer will turn out to be crappy when you can see no punch in what he does, and the only thing that remains is an ordinary formula reaching nowhere. We can hear unexpected wonderful tunes made upon very simple and ordinary, formulaic structures, like the 12 bar blues or whatever. After all, what will count has no name. Gear doesn't matter, styles doesn't matter. It lies only in the artist himself. On 07/04/2008, at 15:57, Michael Pujos wrote: kent williams a écrit : This seems to come up a lot -- people complaining about laptop performers, software-based production, etc. This is where the dub vs mnml thread seemed to be going. I don't want to start another debate, or another repetition of the same people launching the same mortars over the wall at each other, but I want to say this (perhaps again): 1. Judge the results, not the technique. 2. The theoretical 'futurism' of techno would almost demand embracing of new technology. 3. You can make crappy dance music with a 909, 808, 303, SH101 and a MPC60 too. You're just out $10k more on hardware than you would be with your laptop and cracked copy of fruity loops. 4. Why give people points for making virtue of a necessity, if the results don't measure up? The so called futurism of techno is debatable. I just wish for good and ambitious music whether it is futuristic or not. My main problem right now is the flood of crappy music generated by the fact the barrier of entry to make music is lower than in the hardware era. Random Joe makes a loop, add random sounds, and voila: instant track that goes knowhere that might find a label since it's so easy to release digitally. Listening sequentially to listings of beatport or juno is a painful experience My other concern is that a lot of those new producers follow a formula, wheter it's mnml, house, etc where the composition of their track is s predictable. It's boring too tears. Even some tracks considered super good by most of the people of this list can enter the predictable, and does not bring anything new to the table even if a little category. These days I prefer music that push things forward a bit, whether it's from Digitonal, Jacen Solo or Matt Chester (hi Matt!) for example. After all those years, I have less and less patience for music that just replicates a formula, as well produced as it is.
(313) monolake
while i admire the dude's monodeck engineering skillz, i've found that what i've listened to by him has been painfully forgettable. yet, people consistently recommend him, so i'm curious... is there any monolake release that holds up to the relatively high standards we have on this list? /flamebait -- peace, frank dj mix archive: http://www.deejaycountzero.com
Re: (313) monolake
agreed. maybe i am not hearing the right thing or understanding how postmodern it is, and with the understanding at how talented he is with technology, if feels a bit over my head. On 4/7/08, Frank Glazer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: while i admire the dude's monodeck engineering skillz, i've found that what i've listened to by him has been painfully forgettable. yet, people consistently recommend him, so i'm curious... is there any monolake release that holds up to the relatively high standards we have on this list? /flamebait -- peace, frank dj mix archive: http://www.deejaycountzero.com -- --- Michael Kuszynski [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.planerecordings.com New York, NY
Re: (313) techno vs technique
Kowalsky a écrit : Michael, when small bass/drums/guitar combos came out, people said the same thing: now anyone can do music and it's gonna be crappy. When producers didn't have to learn musical theory or music notation to make music, people said the same thing. Probably, people said the same thing when Guttenberg came out with mobile typography in the XV century: now everyone will be able to read and write and print any crap they like. Can't you see that the loop is the fact that people tend to be conservative when facing changes? Changes for me are exciting. And we're privileged to live years of such revolutionary changes. Y'all know what i mean. The formulaic thing... We work in two ways here. In one way, formulas built the styles, the genres. It comes the expression of many, of a society or a community. It's important. Like american soul music and the fight for the civil rights. It has its beauty integrated to a social factor - its indivisible. In other way, a composer will turn out to be crappy when you can see no punch in what he does, and the only thing that remains is an ordinary formula reaching nowhere. We can hear unexpected wonderful tunes made upon very simple and ordinary, formulaic structures, like the 12 bar blues or whatever. After all, what will count has no name. Gear doesn't matter, styles doesn't matter. It lies only in the artist himself. Sure but artists do music for a variety of reasons: getting better known to get gigs, a crappy remix to get a few $ because everybody and his mother needs to remix each other these days, and sometimes finally for the love of music. So it lies in the artist yes, but talented artists that do music for the good reasons, have a real artistic vision and the mean to realize it, are not so common. As for the formula, a point that annoys me is that much music is formatted to be DJ friendly, ie an unterminable 2-3min intro with next to nothing in it. And I'm talking of house here. I was relieved the other day when I got this great new Delano Smith EP and most tracks were starting straight away on point and about 5:30 [to those who'd say its formulaic, sometimes its so well done than it does not matter]. As a counter example of being formulaic, take most of the incredible Iridite back catalog: most tracks are not that much linear and offers suprises to the listener. Something not much people take the risk to do these days. Dan Curtin also excels as making non linear and intricate techno. It's not so much a surprise that non DJ friendly stuff allow a bit more of creativity composition wise. Anyway don't take all of the above to the letter: things are more sublte than I can express them, as English is not my native language.
Re: (313) minimal suxs like dub
Well, Arturo, i got your point. But i really have another opinion about minimal. I'm not a native english speaker, but i'll try. Forgive any mistakes. Minimal is not necesserally less, or minus. But, sometimes, it ends up being the use of less elements. The use of silence and empty spaces as an element instead of a pause or a nothing. We know that when we say something, or when we write something, people will never get exactly what we meant. There'll be always pieces blent together and holes that opens the possibility to other interpretations to fill in. Maybe, in the minimalistic forms, you these holes stretched. The intention of minimal, i guess, comes from the oposition to the whole dictationship created by the music of the romantic period, wich involved high eloquence to tecnically impose an established and only one interpretation. In many parts of the world, folk music is born minimal. The music from the people of the Xingu river valley, in Brazil, is very very very stripped to the bones. Japanese music is naturally minimal. In fact, most of the inspiration for many of the minimalist artists came from Japan. I see a lot of people categorizing dronal or repetition as minimalism. Sometimes, a drone or a repetitive pattern can configure a minimal structure, but not always. They can be in a modus of adding up indefinetly till turn into a mass of noise or white noise. The songs you linked, i feel what you say about they're being minimal. Well, when you compare two songs, there will always be a minimal one comparing to the other. Again, in these songs i can hear many textures, some walls of textures. Maybe they can be called minimal inside the style people call minimal (people name things that sound like EBM or New Beat as electro). They have a shade of some Isaac Hayes dark, dense and slow soul. I think they're intimal, delicate, not eloquent, sutil, but not minimal, in my opinion. A man, sitting in an empty room, playing a violin, can be minimal. Or not. It will depend on what he will play. On 07/04/2008, at 15:17, Arturo Lopez wrote: Good points, Kw. I guess I was focusing more on the classification stuff. You are certainly right about those words being used to describe an approach to production. I guess I'm also drawing my own imaginary line between the sort of disciplined minimal approach t o production you describe versus the sort of minimal that's trendy nowadays. Here's samples of something from I. A. Bericochea, which I think is pretty good minimal. http://www.iabericochea.com/A.mp3 and http://www.iabericochea.com/rojo.mp3 I'd consider that very different than the stuff they are playing in Berlin, even if those samples are from Minus releases (hehe). Arturo Arturo,i think both minimal and dub are named genres, but, above that, minimal and dub are techniques, methods of music production. You can hear minimal not only in techno, you can hear it in the philip glass music, in some post-punk bands, steve reich music, and in many areas of academic/modern music. Minimal is the way of the synthetic, the reducing, the way of the minimal elements necessary for certain expression due to intensify that expression or leave the receptor totally in charge of the interpretation. Dub is style of reggae, yes, but it's a studio technique before that. The use of effects, the focus on the process, the concept of remixing, the producer turning into a composer instead of a simple engineer. Dub techniques are responsable for a revolution in the music production aesthetics. You can see dub versions from Carl Craig songs, Hi-hop songs, Madonna songs, Stevie Wonder songs, etc etc etc. When you have music made in layers, you have dub. Kw
Re: (313) monolake
I really liked his ambient Signal To Noise album, I think it's on a different level to his other releases IMHO: http://www.monolake.de/releases/icm-05.html Patrick. On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 1:31 PM, Frank Glazer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: while i admire the dude's monodeck engineering skillz, i've found that what i've listened to by him has been painfully forgettable. yet, people consistently recommend him, so i'm curious... is there any monolake release that holds up to the relatively high standards we have on this list? /flamebait -- peace, frank dj mix archive: http://www.deejaycountzero.com -- -- Southern Outpost Sydney - San Francisco - Berlin http://www.southernoutpost.com --
Re: (313) monolake
On Apr 7, 2008, at 5:12 PM, Southern Outpost wrote: I really liked his ambient Signal To Noise album, I think it's on a different level to his other releases IMHO: http://www.monolake.de/releases/icm-05.html He's got some other ambient stuff up for free download on monolake.de that is also better than his dancefloor stuff. Honestly, all his tracks that I like are remixes by other people. -- matt kane's brain http://hydrogenproject.com aim - mkbatwerk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: (313) Vinyl meltdown
The bowls on that site are VERY easy to make. Place the center of record on top of an oven safe large glass bowl and heat in a low temp over until a bowl is formed. Let bowl fully cool before taking it off the glass bowl. I've done it to several records that are useless and currently use them as bowls on my office desk. On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 1:32 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: give them to someone crafty http://www.eco-artware.com/catalog/MMM2-album-bracelet.php MEK [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 04/07/2008 12:14:11 PM: I'd also be keen to find out more about this. I have 6 boxes of records sitting in Berlin that are too expensive to ship to the US and i'd prefer to recycle those suckers :) On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 10:11 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Odd question (and I can't remember if I asked it before on here): Was it just Trax (and presumably a few other similar shady ops back then) that used to melt old records down for new pressings? Or is (was) this common practice? I ask as 1. I have a cupboard full of an overrun on a 12 from years ago that I need to chuck out. I'm big on recycling and would love it if the plastic could live again (hopefully with something much better stamped on) rather than just putting them out for dumping. 2. Having started to think about it I'm curious as to any history anyone knows on this practise anyway. -- -- Southern Outpost Sydney - San Francisco - Berlin http://www.southernoutpost.com -- -- Detroit Techno Militia http://www.detroittechnomilitia.com
Re: (313) techno vs technique
It seems that we agree in many points. So, no reason to take this further as a debate. I usually don't like the functional music, made for the (lousy) DJ. I've seen a lot of djs being fooled buy some dj unfriendly UR tunes, wich the first kick is not the 1 in the tempo count. Funny. :-D On 07/04/2008, at 17:48, Michael Pujos wrote: Kowalsky a écrit : Michael, when small bass/drums/guitar combos came out, people said the same thing: now anyone can do music and it's gonna be crappy. When producers didn't have to learn musical theory or music notation to make music, people said the same thing. Probably, people said the same thing when Guttenberg came out with mobile typography in the XV century: now everyone will be able to read and write and print any crap they like. Can't you see that the loop is the fact that people tend to be conservative when facing changes? Changes for me are exciting. And we're privileged to live years of such revolutionary changes. Y'all know what i mean. The formulaic thing... We work in two ways here. In one way, formulas built the styles, the genres. It comes the expression of many, of a society or a community. It's important. Like american soul music and the fight for the civil rights. It has its beauty integrated to a social factor - its indivisible. In other way, a composer will turn out to be crappy when you can see no punch in what he does, and the only thing that remains is an ordinary formula reaching nowhere. We can hear unexpected wonderful tunes made upon very simple and ordinary, formulaic structures, like the 12 bar blues or whatever. After all, what will count has no name. Gear doesn't matter, styles doesn't matter. It lies only in the artist himself. Sure but artists do music for a variety of reasons: getting better known to get gigs, a crappy remix to get a few $ because everybody and his mother needs to remix each other these days, and sometimes finally for the love of music. So it lies in the artist yes, but talented artists that do music for the good reasons, have a real artistic vision and the mean to realize it, are not so common. As for the formula, a point that annoys me is that much music is formatted to be DJ friendly, ie an unterminable 2-3min intro with next to nothing in it. And I'm talking of house here. I was relieved the other day when I got this great new Delano Smith EP and most tracks were starting straight away on point and about 5:30 [to those who'd say its formulaic, sometimes its so well done than it does not matter]. As a counter example of being formulaic, take most of the incredible Iridite back catalog: most tracks are not that much linear and offers suprises to the listener. Something not much people take the risk to do these days. Dan Curtin also excels as making non linear and intricate techno. It's not so much a surprise that non DJ friendly stuff allow a bit more of creativity composition wise. Anyway don't take all of the above to the letter: things are more sublte than I can express them, as English is not my native language.
Re: (313) monolake
On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 4:31 PM, Frank Glazer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: while i admire the dude's monodeck engineering skillz, i've found that what i've listened to by him has been painfully forgettable. yet, people consistently recommend him, so i'm curious... is there any monolake release that holds up to the relatively high standards we have on this list? i like some of his oldest chain reaction stuff that's on this one: http://www.discogs.com/release/652 and i have to say, i recall liking polygon cities. its different from the older stuff, but it had some nice clean round sounding jams on it. tom
RE: (313) techno vs technique
But it's a lot easier to put ones random software noodlings up as a download, ostensibly as releasable quality, than it is, or was, to get it pressed on vinyl and then sold from a location. -Original Message- From: kent williams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 07, 2008 12:43 PM To: Michael Pujos Cc: Frank Glazer; 313 Subject: Re: (313) techno vs technique Lest we forget, how many absolutely sh1t records were put out in Chicago and Detroit in the late 80s/early 90s 'golden age' of techno and house? We tend to forget the crap, and eventually it's all ground up and Archer uses it again. On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 2:24 PM, Michael Pujos [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Frank Glazer a écrit : My main problem right now is the flood of crappy music generated by the fact the barrier of entry to make music is lower than in the hardware era. Random Joe makes a loop, add random sounds, and voila: instant track that goes knowhere that might find a label since it's so easy to release digitally. Listening sequentially to listings of beatport or juno is a painful experience i hear this argument a lot and i think it's rubbish. i'm sure industry people were saying the same thing when chicagoans started belting out drum tracks on (then) cheap roland boxes in the early 80s, but that turned out pretty good, i'd say. think of it this way, you could just as easily go back in time and imagine similar things being said, like this: the fact the barrier of entry to make music is lower than in the symphonic era/big band era/rock n roll quartet era/arena rock era. technology always changes and expands the possibilities for music, both good and bad. if you don't like the bad, don't support it. pretty simple equation. The good news with the easy access to making music is that in all those new producers a few outstanding ones will emerge. So there's still hope for great music and advancing technolgy heh :) No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.8/1362 - Release Date: 4/6/2008 11:12 AM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.8/1362 - Release Date: 4/6/2008 11:12 AM
(313) fm5 and Placid's Dirty jackin hifi mix tracklists?
Trying to track down tracklists for these two mixes: fm5 (not sure who mixed this or where I got it from, but googling finds nothing) and dirty jackin hifi mix from Placid (from 313). Placid? Anyone know who mixed fm5? That's the only info that appears in the file. Thanks. Andrew -- sound/music/DJ courses I teach: http://andrew-duke.com/course.html Chain Reaction downloadable samplepack: http://www.audiobase.com/product/SACR Andrew Duke--Consumer vs. User album: http://www.phthalo.com/cat.php?cat=phth40 artist features column: http://cognitionaudioworks.com/read.html http://myspace.com/andrewduke http://myspace.com/cognitionaudioworks
RE: (313) monolake
-Original Message- From: Frank Glazer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 07 April 2008 21:31 To: 313 Subject: (313) monolake while i admire the dude's monodeck engineering skillz, i've found that what i've listened to by him has been painfully forgettable. yet, people consistently recommend him, so i'm curious... is there any monolake release that holds up to the relatively high standards we have on this list? Not anything like a completists, but I rate highly the old CR stuff, Tangent II (prolly my fave) and Cern for starters, plus the more recent 12s from the last year or so. Tristan === http://www.phonopsia.co.uk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: (313) contemporary academic music literature?
I would be remiss if I didn't mention Mark Butler's book. He's a good friend, so my recommendation isn't unbiased, but his work is really important for high-level academic work that takes the actual sound of techno seriously. Some basic knowledge of music theory will help you get through some of the more analytic sections, but even without that the book offers plenty of insights. The title is Unlocking the Groove: Rhythm, Meter and Musical Design in Electronic Dance Music obligatory amazon link: http://www.amazon.com/Unlocking-Groove-Musical-Electronic-Profiles/dp/ 0253218047/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8s=booksqid=1207614607sr=8-1 LMGM On Apr 7, 2008, at 11:38 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Have you read Oliver Sacks book (saw it's paired with the one you posted) Musicophilia? http://www.amazon.com/Musicophilia-Tales-Music-Oliver-Sacks/dp/ 1400040817/ref=pd_bxgy_b_text_b talks about music and sound from a perspective of neurological disorders not really academic-level but fascinating all the same not about techno but the applications to it should be obvious African Rhythm and African Sensibility: Aesthetics and Social Action in African Musical Idioms by John Miller Chernoff http://www.amazon.com/African-Rhythm-Sensibility-Aesthetics-Musical/ dp/0226103455/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8s=booksqid=1207585721sr=1-1 well, that's more anthropological actually but it's a great read better still if you can actually read some notation (which I can't very well but still found it to be a great book) MEK Frank Glazer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 04/07/2008 01:52:31 AM: i recently read this book http://www.amazon.com/This-Your-Brain-Music-Obsession/dp/0525949690 and enjoyed it quite a bit, but ideally i'm looking for something that's a bit less rock and a bit more techno. can anybody recommend any contemporary (21st century) academic-level critical writing and/or research on electronic music (or music in general) that is worth reading? as an example, i've been meaning to read this piece that martin posted a few months ago: http://folk.uio.no/hanst/Manchester/ ChicagoHouse.htm not as interested in the cultural or historical aspects either (ala love saves the day and last night a dj saved my life, both of which i've read), but feel free to share if something is extraordinary. please no commentary from those who think music can't/shouldn't be discussed scientifically. :) -- peace, frank dj mix archive: http://www.deejaycountzero.com
Re: (313) Vinyl meltdown
Odd question (and I can't remember if I asked it before on here): Was it just Trax (and presumably a few other similar shady ops back then) that used to melt old records down for new pressings? Or is (was) this common practice? it was / is a pretty common practice. what do you think happened to the stock at the big distributors in america after they closed down?
Re: (313) techno vs technique
But the previous iteration to which you refer was in turn much easier than the wave before it, when you actually had to get 3-6 (or more) people to agree on a tune and play in relatively perfectly synchronization, get into a studio, record it and mix it analogously, and promote and distribute it. And play shows, virtually living together for years on end--assuming they hit. And that in turn was much easier than symphony music... and so on down the line... in short, have a point. On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 12:03 PM, rg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But it's a lot easier to put ones random software noodlings up as a download, ostensibly as releasable quality, than it is, or was, to get it pressed on vinyl and then sold from a location.
Re: (313) monolake
It's hit or miss, but like Matt said, other people remixing his music is usually quite good. Check out the Alaska remixes by Surgeon and Substance, good stuff. That Surgeon remix is such a mean tune. http://www.boomkat.com/item.cfm?id=24374 Linear Atomium Reminiscence (try saying that three times fast..) is also a good release, I've started a few fun sets off with the deep track from that record. Forgot the name, however. -Arturo
Re: (313) techno vs technique
As far as this original topic goes...I've created music on hardware and software, and find advantages to both. It is the user's knowledge and input rather than the machines. The problem I see is usually between the interface and the chair...not the equipment. I have known tons of people who have had the 'right' equipment for doing this music we love, yet have no earthly idea how to make what they want to make. FWIW, I'll take Claude Young with a laptop over some hack with a 909 and every toy imaginable. -- fbk sleepengineering/absoloop US
