RE: (313) CJB and IDM was - Re: (313) Re: Cubik
> > The only things earlier were basscadet ep and the > incunabula LP, leaving > > cavity job out of this.. > > Doh! My apologies. I should've remembered that, especially > since at that > time we were getting Autechre re-releases in the states a > *long* time after > the UK release date. Are you sure ? I remember reading on some Autechre fan site that Cavity Job was their very first release ? http://membres.lycos.fr/autechre_gescom/singles.htm Gwendal
RE: (313) Re: Cubik
yup... more here : http://blindyouth.com/ Gwendal > -Original Message- > From: Odeluga, Ken [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 11:34 AM > To: Cobert, Gwendal; 313 Detroit > Subject: RE: (313) Re: Cubik > > > Would this include works with the other original members of The Human > League, Martyn Ware, (Glenn Gregory?) and Craig Marsh (AKA Heaven 17)? > > Cheers, > k > > >-Original Message- > >From: Cobert, Gwendal [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 10:26 AM > >To: 313 Detroit > >Subject: RE: (313) Re: Cubik > > > > > >> Or the fabulous re-issue of the Human League's Dare and Love > >> & Dancing... I > >> was a kid when Dare came out and listening to my mum's > >> records and she was > >> never convinced to get it, she liked Eurythmics more. I am glad, I > >> appreciate the experimental side more now! > >> > >> I don't mind the electroclash myself, like Ladytron are great. > > > >Coming late to that discussion, so this may have been > already said : the > >Human League have just released a collection of obscurities from > >their early > >days, "Golden hour of the Future", under the name "The Human > League & The > >Future". Includes an incredible single, "Dance like a star", > plus several > >very fine cuts of early/lo-fi synth pop. Really worth checking. > >Gwendal > > >
RE: (313) Re: Cubik
Would this include works with the other original members of The Human League, Martyn Ware, (Glenn Gregory?) and Craig Marsh (AKA Heaven 17)? Cheers, k >-Original Message- >From: Cobert, Gwendal [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 10:26 AM >To: 313 Detroit >Subject: RE: (313) Re: Cubik > > >> Or the fabulous re-issue of the Human League's Dare and Love >> & Dancing... I >> was a kid when Dare came out and listening to my mum's >> records and she was >> never convinced to get it, she liked Eurythmics more. I am glad, I >> appreciate the experimental side more now! >> >> I don't mind the electroclash myself, like Ladytron are great. > >Coming late to that discussion, so this may have been already said : the >Human League have just released a collection of obscurities from >their early >days, "Golden hour of the Future", under the name "The Human League & The >Future". Includes an incredible single, "Dance like a star", plus several >very fine cuts of early/lo-fi synth pop. Really worth checking. >Gwendal >
RE: (313) Re: Cubik
> Or the fabulous re-issue of the Human League's Dare and Love > & Dancing... I > was a kid when Dare came out and listening to my mum's > records and she was > never convinced to get it, she liked Eurythmics more. I am glad, I > appreciate the experimental side more now! > > I don't mind the electroclash myself, like Ladytron are great. Coming late to that discussion, so this may have been already said : the Human League have just released a collection of obscurities from their early days, "Golden hour of the Future", under the name "The Human League & The Future". Includes an incredible single, "Dance like a star", plus several very fine cuts of early/lo-fi synth pop. Really worth checking. Gwendal
Re: (313) Re: Cubik
Or the fabulous re-issue of the Human League's Dare and Love & Dancing... I was a kid when Dare came out and listening to my mum's records and she was never convinced to get it, she liked Eurythmics more. I am glad, I appreciate the experimental side more now! I don't mind the electroclash myself, like Ladytron are great. > From: sean deason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: (313) Re: Cubik > Date: 16/12/2002 22:09:52 > To: Dennis DeSantis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > - Original Message - > From: "Dennis DeSantis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> And I never hear it done as well as I heard it done the >> first time. So if I want to hear that music, I'll listen to Yello, or >> Gary Numan, or Art of Noise, or Kraftwerk. If I want nostalgia, I'll >> take the stuff that I'm ACTUALLY nostalgic for, not some half-assed >> knock-off. > > That's exactly how I feel about this whole Electroclash thing too. I if > wanted to hear Joy Division all I have to do is, put on a Joy Division > record from my collection. I looking at YOU Swayzak!! > > sean > > >
Re: (313) CJB and IDM was - Re: (313) Re: Cubik
- Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <313@hyperreal.org> Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 1:17 PM Subject: Re: (313) CJB and IDM was - Re: (313) Re: Cubik > > Anti ep was released before Amber! > > > The only things earlier were basscadet ep and the incunabula LP, leaving > cavity job out of this.. Doh! My apologies. I should've remembered that, especially since at that time we were getting Autechre re-releases in the states a *long* time after the UK release date. Tristan = Text/Mixes: http://phonopsia.tripod.com Music: http://www.mp313.com Contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] New Mix in mp3, 'Live in Iowa City' available for a short time from http://phonopsia.isoprax.com
Re: (313) CJB and IDM was - Re: (313) Re: Cubik
Anti ep was released before Amber! The only things earlier were basscadet ep and the incunabula LP, leaving cavity job out of this.. Remco
(313) CJB and IDM was - Re: (313) Re: Cubik
- Original Message - From: "K Money" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <313@hyperreal.org> Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 6:28 AM Subject: RE: (313) Re: Cubik > This may be BS, but from what I recall, some of the early 90's IDM > artists came about as a reaction to the Criminal Justice Act in England, > which had a piece to it which basically said that if more than 2 people > were gathered in a spot and dancing to rhythmic music, they could be > charged with a crime. Making music non-rhythmic may have been a cheeky > way of keeping on. To be extremely literal about it, there's one example of exactly what you're talking about. Autechre had already released Incanabula, Amber and a couple EPs before the CJB was passed, but the Anti-EP was contemporary with the debate. The A side 'Flutter' had a disclaimer that it was composed entirely of non-repetitive beats, and that you should have a musicologist on-hand in case the authorities should attempt to stop you from playing the song under the proposed new legislation. The B side said something like 'This side is comprised entriely of repetitive beats. Do not play under the proposed legislation.' On that note: 'Flutter' is one of the best tracks ever. Sorry. In general I think there's got to be something to the strength of England's contribution to IDM, and this may be it, but if you're going to draw a causal relationship, you need to explain how drum 'n bass peaked during the first couple of years of the CJB. Tristan = Text/Mixes: http://phonopsia.tripod.com Music: http://www.mp313.com Contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] New Mix in mp3, 'Live in Iowa City' available for a short time from http://phonopsia.isoprax.com
Re: (313) Re: Cubik
- Original Message - From: "Dennis DeSantis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > And I never hear it done as well as I heard it done the > first time. So if I want to hear that music, I'll listen to Yello, or > Gary Numan, or Art of Noise, or Kraftwerk. If I want nostalgia, I'll > take the stuff that I'm ACTUALLY nostalgic for, not some half-assed > knock-off. That's exactly how I feel about this whole Electroclash thing too. I if wanted to hear Joy Division all I have to do is, put on a Joy Division record from my collection. I looking at YOU Swayzak!! sean
Re: (313) Re: Cubik
> sure, i have no problem, but the problem lies in the > name "intelligent dance music". this assumes a few things: > > 1. you are making music to dance to > 2. there is "non-intelligent" dance music > Hi, I understand what you're saying here but consider that most IDM producers wouldnt label their music as IDM in the Intelligent Dance Music way. its just a label that is associated with a genre of electronic music. a bad label at that. Im sure most of them wouldnt claim that their music is more intelligent nor would they claim that you can dance to it. to some IDMers, the method with which the audio is produced is nearly as important as the characteristics of the audio itself. I would classify what richard devine speaks of as soundscape or experimental over IDM. math trax typically lack that continuously cohesive rhythm which makes you want to dance to it. yay techno! boo math beats! ;P -Joe
Re: (313) Re: Cubik
Thomas D. Cox, Jr. wrote: sure, but so little music is just straight up derivative. But I want it to be even less derivative. Revolution! And yeah, that goes for my own music too... sure alot of those musics you mention did do things in a new way. however, you can sit down and listen and hear where they came from Of course. But there was enough new in them to make me happy. And not enough new music makes me happy, because I don't hear enough new in it. but thats not a bad thing : ) he didnt attempt to sacrifice good music for complexity in composition. Agreed. -- Dennis DeSantis www.dennisdesantis.com
Re: (313) Re: Cubik
-- Original Message -- From: Dennis DeSantis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >I claim the exact opposite - if a style of music is stricly all about >"TEN YEARS AGO" then its meaning a decade down the line is "wow, that >sounds 20 years old." sure, but so little music is just straight up derivative. it might use influence from the specified older sounds, but thats it. for example, Metro Area records are clearly influenced by some old music, yet they still sound fresh. on the other hand is the new synthpop derivative music, which i will discuss later on in this email. >To my ears, the most revolutionary, awe-inspiring music is the music >that comes the closest to breaking with its tradition. In my personal, >completely subjective box this will include music like the late >Beethoven string quartets, The Rite Of Spring, Sgt. Pepper, the early >Basic Channel records, Theorem's "Ion", some Autechre. >For me, those records make my ears burn because I'm hearing stuff that's >only tangentially related to historical context but that takes a >COMPLETELY different spin on it and in a direction that's different from >anything else happening at the time. sure alot of those musics you mention did do things in a new way. however, you can sit down and listen and hear where they came from, even if they flipped it around and changed it a good bit. you can follow the change of the sound through these people and on to others. > >And this, to swing things a bit back more on topic (and probably to >paint a big red target on my head), is why I have yet to hear any of >this 80s revival stuff that I want to hear more than once. It's because >I DON'T hear an attempt to push at the edges. I don't even hear an >attempt to refine a tradition. I only hear an attempt to REPEAT a >tradition. And I never hear it done as well as I heard it done the >first time. So if I want to hear that music, I'll listen to Yello, or >Gary Numan, or Art of Noise, or Kraftwerk. If I want nostalgia, I'll >take the stuff that I'm ACTUALLY nostalgic for, not some half- assed >knock-off. > i agree with you totally. there is a distinct difference between knowing your music's history and your place in it and showing your influence and to just knocking something off totally. the difference is impossible to describe in words though. i think the worst thing you can say about any music is that it is "derivative", and the recent 80's knockoff electroclash stuff for the most part is entirely derivative. >Right, but it's simpler math. I don't mean that in an elitist way at >all, but Eno's music doesn't wear its design on its sleeve. The process >is below the surface and the surface is shimmering and pretty and even >little kids and grandmas won't get hurt by it. but thats not a bad thing : ) he didnt attempt to sacrifice good music for complexity in composition. beethoven did the same thing, some of his best parts are the simplest and easiest to understand for just about anyone. >aI couldn't agree with you more about this. IDM is the most >ridiculous name imaginable because it doesn't actually tell you anything >about the music, the artists, or the listeners besides their assumed air >of importance. i dont necessarily disgree with it so much on those grounds, even though all of what you said is true. i just like musical terms to make sense in relation to each other. i call what i used to spin "jungle" because thats what it was to me, not "drum and bass". what LTJ bukem made was "intelligent jungle". if IDM was still similar to what it once was, i would understand continuing to call it that. tom andythepooh.com
Re: (313) Re: Cubik
Thomas D. Cox, Jr. wrote: if a style of music is strictly all about "NOW" then its meaning a decade down the line doesnt mean a thing. I claim the exact opposite - if a style of music is stricly all about "TEN YEARS AGO" then its meaning a decade down the line is "wow, that sounds 20 years old." To my ears, the most revolutionary, awe-inspiring music is the music that comes the closest to breaking with its tradition. In my personal, completely subjective box this will include music like the late Beethoven string quartets, The Rite Of Spring, Sgt. Pepper, the early Basic Channel records, Theorem's "Ion", some Autechre. For me, those records make my ears burn because I'm hearing stuff that's only tangentially related to historical context but that takes a COMPLETELY different spin on it and in a direction that's different from anything else happening at the time. And this, to swing things a bit back more on topic (and probably to paint a big red target on my head), is why I have yet to hear any of this 80s revival stuff that I want to hear more than once. It's because I DON'T hear an attempt to push at the edges. I don't even hear an attempt to refine a tradition. I only hear an attempt to REPEAT a tradition. And I never hear it done as well as I heard it done the first time. So if I want to hear that music, I'll listen to Yello, or Gary Numan, or Art of Noise, or Kraftwerk. If I want nostalgia, I'll take the stuff that I'm ACTUALLY nostalgic for, not some half-assed knock-off. a good point, but for sure they might still like it. i mean you can listen to eno's "discreet music" and its all about mathematically making music, and it still sounds good to people who arent hardcore electronic music fans. Right, but it's simpler math. I don't mean that in an elitist way at all, but Eno's music doesn't wear its design on its sleeve. The process is below the surface and the surface is shimmering and pretty and even little kids and grandmas won't get hurt by it. sure, i have no problem, but the problem lies in the name "intelligent dance music". this assumes a few things: 1. you are making music to dance to 2. there is "non-intelligent" dance music aI couldn't agree with you more about this. IDM is the most ridiculous name imaginable because it doesn't actually tell you anything about the music, the artists, or the listeners besides their assumed air of importance. yet 2 more cents, and pockets full o' pennies, -- Dennis DeSantis www.dennisdesantis.com
RE: (313) Re: Cubik
This may be BS, but from what I recall, some of the early 90's IDM artists came about as a reaction to the Criminal Justice Act in England, which had a piece to it which basically said that if more than 2 people were gathered in a spot and dancing to rhythmic music, they could be charged with a crime. Making music non-rhythmic may have been a cheeky way of keeping on. Oh, by the way, just to stay 'on-topic', 808state gets my full respect. I adore all of their music, as well as Graham Massey's remix work. I also believe the group was heavily involved with Eastern Bloc records. If it wasn't for the Toronto franchise I probably wouldn't have the collection I have today. Gerald can lick it. Well ok, Voodoo Ray does strike up some fond memories ;) VAI3 -Original Message- From: Thomas D. Cox, Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2002 11:32 PM To: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: (313) Re: Cubik -- Original Message -- From: Dennis DeSantis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sure, I'll agree with that. But my making this claim you must realize >that you've also completely negated your original arguments, which were: > >"its like they lose the history of the music altogether, >what happened in the past is no longer relevant, the only thing >that matters is what will happen tomorrow." > >and > >"i guess thats the >appeal of the whole IDM thing to some people, to constantly >progress without looking backwards" > >If it's all on a single timeline, then you can't really "lose your >roots" at all. But after hundreds of years the connections are >stretched so thin as to be no longer recognizeable - much less >recognizeable as the connections between current IDM and old IDM, the >history of which, for our purposes here spans maybe 20 years. I think >you and I would both agree that current IDM sounds quite a bit more like >"roots" IDM than 13th Century French chanson. And I think scholars of >13th Century French chanson would agree as well (as would scholars of IDM.) > >My point is simply that you can't have it both ways. You can't argue >that a particular genre has lost its roots, and then argue that music is >all inter-connected and each moment has a causal influence on each other >moment. here's the problem: IDM has gone from being more traditionally techno/ambient based in the early 90's to being a reaction against just about anything they feel like going against, mostly melody and rhythm as far as i can tell. it seems (to me at least) that its just on this course of making music as mathematically "complex" as possible while becoming increasingly unlistenable. the "roots" of IDM were not quite so forceful, for lack of a better word. the initial IDM artists were certainly creating an alternative to the "cheesy" dance music popular at the time. now it has gone on to create an alternative to itself, which is what is leading it in a downward spiral IMO. if it kept its roots, it wouldnt be quite so harsh and unlistenable to the average dance music fan. i mean alot of early aphex twin and suqrepusher etc records can easily be played alongside their "unintelligent" counterparts. drum and bass has gone on a similar path by making any music that is too obviously "jungle" sounding not fit in with its current "progression" which is to constantly evolve a sound from itself instead of creating the futuristic hybrid that it initially was. obviously not ALL drum and bass or IDM is like this, but for the most part the general movement of the music has become too far removed from what it initially was for the older music to still be relevant to a person becoming a fan of the newer tunes. tom andythepooh.com
Re: (313) Re: Cubik
-- Original Message -- From: Dennis DeSantis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >I completely agree with your explanation. I just don't hear these >things as inherently negative. >I tend to really enjoy music that struggles to break out of its >inevitable connections with history. The struggle (and subsequent >failure) to create something entirely new often tends to push the >boundaries, and I'm often a big fan of things that push those boundaries. im not saying that theyre negative, i am however saying that making music based on this kind of idea will not create "timeless" music, in fact it creates nearly disposeable music. thats all. the discussion was about why certain styles of music dont continue to sound good years later, and if a style of music is strictly all about "NOW" then its meaning a decade down the line doesnt mean a thing. >(Now at this point, anyone reading this who's heard my music is probably >thinking "Push boundaries? This dude writes froofy tech-house that >sounds like 70s disco mixed with 60s jazz!" Well, that's true. I >reserve the right to not practice what I preach ;) hahahaha. >I don't think they're shooting for the average dance music fan. I >recently read an interview with Richard Devine where he talked about >designing systems that would churn out musical material using chaos >theory and fractal math. I can't imagine that he's thinking about Timmy >Trainspotter or Ellen Ecstasytab if he's discussing those things in >interviews. a good point, but for sure they might still like it. i mean you can listen to eno's "discreet music" and its all about mathematically making music, and it still sounds good to people who arent hardcore electronic music fans. >For better or for worse, I think those folks are after a >completely different target market than most folks who are writing >floor-friendly techno. And I think that's healthy. I think diversity >among electronic music sub-genres is a good thing. sure, i have no problem, but the problem lies in the name "intelligent dance music". this assumes a few things: 1. you are making music to dance to 2. there is "non-intelligent" dance music now im not ever going to argue about what music is good for dancing or not because that is too subjective. however, i certainly believe that the IDM scene has long since (and admittedly, nonetheless) moved away from writing music with the purpose to make people dance. in the same way that true "rave" music doesnt exist anymore, IDM doesnt really exist by its own definition either. would i like it if IDM separated itself from what was traditionally IDM (like those old aphex records) and began calling itself "avant guarde electronic music"? sure, since i believe it has more in common there than it does with the early records that were reacting to a certain element in the dance music scene. >And I think those >weird areas where the boundaries blur (like the early Aphex records you >mentioned) are amazing as well. blurring boundaries make the best records, no question. like i said, my main qualm here is that what is IDM today is too unrelated to what it once was that i think it should no longer be considered the same thing. : ) tom andythepooh.com
Re: (313) Re: Cubik
Thomas D. Cox, Jr. wrote: here's the problem: IDM has gone from being more traditionally techno/ambient based in the early 90's to being a reaction against just about anything they feel like going against, mostly melody and rhythm as far as i can tell. it seems (to me at least) that its just on this course of making music as mathematically "complex" as possible while becoming increasingly unlistenable. I completely agree with your explanation. I just don't hear these things as inherently negative. I tend to really enjoy music that struggles to break out of its inevitable connections with history. The struggle (and subsequent failure) to create something entirely new often tends to push the boundaries, and I'm often a big fan of things that push those boundaries. (Now at this point, anyone reading this who's heard my music is probably thinking "Push boundaries? This dude writes froofy tech-house that sounds like 70s disco mixed with 60s jazz!" Well, that's true. I reserve the right to not practice what I preach ;) > if it kept its > roots, it wouldnt be quite so harsh and unlistenable to the > average dance music fan. I don't think they're shooting for the average dance music fan. I recently read an interview with Richard Devine where he talked about designing systems that would churn out musical material using chaos theory and fractal math. I can't imagine that he's thinking about Timmy Trainspotter or Ellen Ecstasytab if he's discussing those things in interviews. For better or for worse, I think those folks are after a completely different target market than most folks who are writing floor-friendly techno. And I think that's healthy. I think diversity among electronic music sub-genres is a good thing. And I think those weird areas where the boundaries blur (like the early Aphex records you mentioned) are amazing as well. -- Dennis DeSantis www.dennisdesantis.com
Re: (313) Re: Cubik
-- Original Message -- From: Dennis DeSantis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sure, I'll agree with that. But my making this claim you must realize >that you've also completely negated your original arguments, which were: > >"its like they lose the history of the music altogether, >what happened in the past is no longer relevant, the only thing >that matters is what will happen tomorrow." > >and > >"i guess thats the >appeal of the whole IDM thing to some people, to constantly >progress without looking backwards" > >If it's all on a single timeline, then you can't really "lose your >roots" at all. But after hundreds of years the connections are >stretched so thin as to be no longer recognizeable - much less >recognizeable as the connections between current IDM and old IDM, the >history of which, for our purposes here spans maybe 20 years. I think >you and I would both agree that current IDM sounds quite a bit more like >"roots" IDM than 13th Century French chanson. And I think scholars of >13th Century French chanson would agree as well (as would scholars of IDM.) > >My point is simply that you can't have it both ways. You can't argue >that a particular genre has lost its roots, and then argue that music is >all inter-connected and each moment has a causal influence on each other >moment. here's the problem: IDM has gone from being more traditionally techno/ambient based in the early 90's to being a reaction against just about anything they feel like going against, mostly melody and rhythm as far as i can tell. it seems (to me at least) that its just on this course of making music as mathematically "complex" as possible while becoming increasingly unlistenable. the "roots" of IDM were not quite so forceful, for lack of a better word. the initial IDM artists were certainly creating an alternative to the "cheesy" dance music popular at the time. now it has gone on to create an alternative to itself, which is what is leading it in a downward spiral IMO. if it kept its roots, it wouldnt be quite so harsh and unlistenable to the average dance music fan. i mean alot of early aphex twin and suqrepusher etc records can easily be played alongside their "unintelligent" counterparts. drum and bass has gone on a similar path by making any music that is too obviously "jungle" sounding not fit in with its current "progression" which is to constantly evolve a sound from itself instead of creating the futuristic hybrid that it initially was. obviously not ALL drum and bass or IDM is like this, but for the most part the general movement of the music has become too far removed from what it initially was for the older music to still be relevant to a person becoming a fan of the newer tunes. tom andythepooh.com
Re: (313) Re: Cubik
I was never a fan of the break beat or drum n'bass but in 1993 I saw DJ Danny Beakz and it definitely gave me new respect for what the genre was all about which would eventually evolve into drum n'bass. The DMC scratching style with a live MC gave me new perspectiveon on break beat which was essentially dj tools music, local dj's would slowly straight blend two records together at normal tempo. I actaually have the intro of that on tape, bad radio interference when it was later rebroadcast: http://pages.prodigy.net/stevepwats/dannybreaks.ram more examples of break beat from "92 which sounds pretty dated, (the second track with the 808 State/ Altern 8 samples is actually from a Dallas techno band): http://pages.prodigy.net/stevepwats/92.ram I can say the same thing about Jeff Mills when I first saw him as a UR Punisher tour spinning hardcore rave era techno, pitching the record up fast paced "Wizard" dj mixing style gave me a new perspective on Detroit techno. I remember when I first saw the Invisible Scratch Pickles on a loud system doing a five turntable set, it was much different then watching them on tape, I got a good feel for what the turntabalism genre was all about, when you see these guys live the scratching really hits you in the balls. on 12/15/02 6:06 PM, Thomas D. Cox, Jr. at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > as far as "Rave" music goes, i think the lack of commitment to any > given sound as its "foundation" is what makes it seem to not have > aged well. as im sure dj Entropy would love to point out, you can > hear the major offshoots of rave music cycle through the "rave > sounds" pretty frequently. the fact is that alot of rave-y techno > falls too far BPM and production qualitywise from any of those > related sub-genres to be mixed up with them and still sound > current. of course ill also shift some blame for that to the > increased awareness of studio virtuosity amongst the drum and > bass, breakbeat, etc production crowd. its like people are too > afraid to make lo-fi sounding rave tunes anymore, and i dont know > why. i mean the lo-fi thing worked in rock music, it works for > theo parrish, etc. with techno this doesnt matter so much since > alot of production still utilizes the same damn equipment used in > the early days. you can even look at the aging of the older 4 hero > and guy called gerald stuff (who had a pronounced techno/detroit > influence) compared to other stuff that was made with just a > sampler and some old house and reggae records and see that some > degree of simlilarity to newer stuff will go a long way to making > older music still sound relevant.
Re: (313) Re: Cubik
At 10:10 PM 12/15/2002, you wrote:
For sampling I still revere Looks Like We're Shy Own Horse by
Colourbox, the best spaghetti western dub tune of all time.
Also love the samples in the acid house era of PTV ("water,
that's what I'm talking about, water"; "now just a cotton-pickin'
minute!", and the Bogart samples from Key Largo).
Things were a lot looser then and some people could nick samples
from famous movies and put them on vinyl :)
fred
Oh yeah. "Give 'em Enough Whiskey" from the s/t LP - heck, the whole record
is superb. I used to love sitting between the speakers for "Edit the
Dragon"...like a sexual climax floating into the anthem-like "Arena II".
jeff
Re: (313) Re: Cubik
For sampling I still revere Looks Like We're Shy Own Horse by
Colourbox, the best spaghetti western dub tune of all time.
Also love the samples in the acid house era of PTV ("water,
that's what I'm talking about, water"; "now just a cotton-pickin'
minute!", and the Bogart samples from Key Largo).
Things were a lot looser then and some people could nick samples
from famous movies and put them on vinyl :)
fred
Re: (313) Re: Cubik
Thomas D. Cox, Jr. wrote: since all music is moving along some sort of timeline where what exists before somehow has some influence on even the "newest" music, its impossible to say that any music is no longer having an effect on the most avant garde music. its part of one huge puzzle, you cant take out any piece and still have the puzzle be complete. Sure, I'll agree with that. But my making this claim you must realize that you've also completely negated your original arguments, which were: "its like they lose the history of the music altogether, what happened in the past is no longer relevant, the only thing that matters is what will happen tomorrow." and "i guess thats the appeal of the whole IDM thing to some people, to constantly progress without looking backwards" If it's all on a single timeline, then you can't really "lose your roots" at all. But after hundreds of years the connections are stretched so thin as to be no longer recognizeable - much less recognizeable as the connections between current IDM and old IDM, the history of which, for our purposes here spans maybe 20 years. I think you and I would both agree that current IDM sounds quite a bit more like "roots" IDM than 13th Century French chanson. And I think scholars of 13th Century French chanson would agree as well (as would scholars of IDM.) My point is simply that you can't have it both ways. You can't argue that a particular genre has lost its roots, and then argue that music is all inter-connected and each moment has a causal influence on each other moment. -- Dennis DeSantis www.dennisdesantis.com
Re: (313) Re: Cubik
-- Original Message -- From: Dennis DeSantis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >I'd qualify this by stating that, while music (and the general >zeitgeist) tends to loop back somewhat, there is also an overarching >sense of "two steps forward, one step back." And if you reach far >enough back into cultural history, you'll find a lot of things that are >just plain dead - no one's lamenting the lack of influence of 13th >Century French chanson or Notre Dame organum on contemporary music. >That music is gone - it exists solely as an historical object. thats absolutely not true. the music had to have some influence on something else. whether that influence took it and changed it into something nearly unreconizeable before moving on is up to someone who knows more about that stuff to decide. however since all music is moving along some sort of timeline where what exists before somehow has some influence on even the "newest" music, its impossible to say that any music is no longer having an effect on the most avant garde music. its part of one huge puzzle, you cant take out any piece and still have the puzzle be complete. >So in that sense what happened in the past IS no longer relevant. And >if you embrace IDM in a modernist context - that what's important is the >lack of precedent and the constant striving for the new, then you can >make a case that that music is as strong as ever - not in spite of but >BECAUSE of the fact that it lacks a connection to its roots. > >This isn't a discussion about objective quality - I don't even try to >have a stand on those issues one way or another. It's just a claim that >some people could make exactly the claims you've made above, but use >them as a defense rather than a criticism. so check this out: IDM is made on computers now for the large part. the using computers to make music didnt just appear out of nowhere one day. you can follow it back (throught techno and disco and electro and so on and so forth) to avante garde type compositions in the early to mid 1900's. and the people making those kinds of things were all influenced to make their new music by certain ideas that already existed in the musical plane, most notably classical music. classical music goes back hundreds of years. so basically youre looking at 20th generation influence on IDM of music written by beethoven, channeled through many minds and many technological advances. its like this: if you took a child who had never heard ANY music ever before in his/her life, and sat them down with a laptop loaded up with live or reason or whatever, and let them figure it out, IDM wouldnt just pop out of nowhere. its not an objective idea thats floating around (although i guess jung might argue that it exists in his collective unconscious, but whatever) that this child could just grab. IDM is built as a reaction to thousands of years of music. anything that is reactionary cant be totally new, even if it is unprecedented. the existance of IDM relies on the existance of all other music before it to define it. am i making any sense? tom andythepooh.com
Re: (313) Re: Cubik
Thomas D. Cox, Jr. wrote: its like they lose the history of the music altogether, what happened in the past is no longer relevant, the only thing that matters is what will happen tomorrow. IDM has some great classic albums: surfing on sine waves, selected ambient works, etc. but now the music has gotten to the point where none of it even sounds remotely connected to its past. i guess thats the appeal of the whole IDM thing to some people, to constantly progress without looking backwards, but personally i think it cant last too long. everything in music eventually doubles back on itself, and IDM will be guilty of it one day as well. I'd qualify this by stating that, while music (and the general zeitgeist) tends to loop back somewhat, there is also an overarching sense of "two steps forward, one step back." And if you reach far enough back into cultural history, you'll find a lot of things that are just plain dead - no one's lamenting the lack of influence of 13th Century French chanson or Notre Dame organum on contemporary music. That music is gone - it exists solely as an historical object. So in that sense what happened in the past IS no longer relevant. And if you embrace IDM in a modernist context - that what's important is the lack of precedent and the constant striving for the new, then you can make a case that that music is as strong as ever - not in spite of but BECAUSE of the fact that it lacks a connection to its roots. This isn't a discussion about objective quality - I don't even try to have a stand on those issues one way or another. It's just a claim that some people could make exactly the claims you've made above, but use them as a defense rather than a criticism. My $.02, -- Dennis DeSantis www.dennisdesantis.com
Re: (313) Re: Cubik
-- Original Message -- From: techno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >On the subject of older techno like 808 State sounding dated, I would say >that is true especially with techno from the rave era. >With electro, Detroit techno, and older Chicago house from the Trax era, >some of the music seems to obtain an electronic purity. >A term people quite often use to describe this pure electronic concept is >techno purist. as far as "Rave" music goes, i think the lack of commitment to any given sound as its "foundation" is what makes it seem to not have aged well. as im sure dj Entropy would love to point out, you can hear the major offshoots of rave music cycle through the "rave sounds" pretty frequently. the fact is that alot of rave-y techno falls too far BPM and production qualitywise from any of those related sub-genres to be mixed up with them and still sound current. of course ill also shift some blame for that to the increased awareness of studio virtuosity amongst the drum and bass, breakbeat, etc production crowd. its like people are too afraid to make lo-fi sounding rave tunes anymore, and i dont know why. i mean the lo-fi thing worked in rock music, it works for theo parrish, etc. with techno this doesnt matter so much since alot of production still utilizes the same damn equipment used in the early days. you can even look at the aging of the older 4 hero and guy called gerald stuff (who had a pronounced techno/detroit influence) compared to other stuff that was made with just a sampler and some old house and reggae records and see that some degree of simlilarity to newer stuff will go a long way to making older music still sound relevant. >Current music that will not stand the test of time in my opinion and will >sound extremely dated atypical of this time period are idm, trance, >progressive house, and drum'n base. >With idm you find that people are almost trying to be too clever with the >the use of sampling and plug-ins/ software, more focused on clever sequence >sound aesthetics than good practical dance music. yeah i think idm is almost as guilty of losing the plot as drum and bass is. drum and bass bears so little resemblance to old hardcore and jungle that it doesnt sound even similar to new audiences. its like they lose the history of the music altogether, what happened in the past is no longer relevant, the only thing that matters is what will happen tomorrow. IDM has some great classic albums: surfing on sine waves, selected ambient works, etc. but now the music has gotten to the point where none of it even sounds remotely connected to its past. i guess thats the appeal of the whole IDM thing to some people, to constantly progress without looking backwards, but personally i think it cant last too long. everything in music eventually doubles back on itself, and IDM will be guilty of it one day as well. >It reminds me of the Art Of Noise and Yellow in the 1980's, more about >technology and experimentation than good music, the use of sampling was >supposed to sound hip and sophisticated at the time but now sounds extremely >dated. yeah ive been having some arguments recently about the objectivity of good music, and one of my biggest arguments is that "new \= good". of course experimental music is always a good thing to listen to and keep up on just because one of those great ideas could be used and taken advantage of in good music, so i wont say only bad things about "forward thinking" music. i just think that good quality songs never go away, and thats what should be concentrated on. tom andythepooh.com
Re: (313) Re: Cubik
- Original Message -
From: "techno" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> It reminds me of the Art Of Noise and Yellow in the 1980's, more about
> technology and experimentation than good music, the use of sampling was
> supposed to sound hip and sophisticated at the time but now sounds
extremely
> dated.
>
I'd have to agree with you on this point. Listening to the "Essential Yello"
CD got pretty old after just one listen. There are a few incredible gems
("Vicious Games" and...and... okay maybe just one gem) on there but the
overuse of "clever" samples really gets on your nerves after a while.
My alltime favorite band (and the worlds most guilty sample abusers) would
have to be Big Audio Dynamite. Thier self-titled debut album contains tons
of samples from "Spaghetti Westerns" and other movies but they fit perfectly
with the cowboy theme of the album. Sometimes Mick Jones would write entire
songs based on a sample from a film (ex: "Dial a Hitman").
Also see Tackhead if you wanna hear an example of 80's sampling done
tastefully. I still break out the "No way out" (or is it "Is there a way
out"?? I cant recall the exact title this early on a Sunday) record from
time to time and still get other DJ's coming up to find out what it is. Add
that to your list of "timeless tracks you never heard of" :^)
sean "still hoping to come across a copy of Moev's "Alibis"" deason
