: RE: [313] blueprint ENCOUNTERS {classifications}
On Fri, 13 Oct 2000, John Shipman wrote:
probably depends who your talking to. tribal' to one won't be tribal
to
another. i find that lots of times the lines between the classifications
of
this and that get blurred. you could definitely use
In a message dated 10/13/00 5:36:23 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
of course, classifications exist because they give people convenient
and simple ways to communicate ideas to one another (albeit sometimes at
the cost of accuracy).
from what I can gather in newsgroups and lists, hard techno
@hyperreal.org
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2000 5:02 PM
Subject: Re: RE: [313] blueprint ENCOUNTERS {classifications}
In a message dated 10/13/00 5:36:23 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
of course, classifications exist because they give people convenient
and simple ways to communicate ideas to one
it
as music, sometimes it seems like categories just get in the way:)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2000 2:53 PM
To: 313@hyperreal.org
Subject: [313] blueprint ENCOUNTERS
I'm listening to blueprint ENCOUNTERS
At 14:52 10/13/2000 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm listening to blueprint ENCOUNTERS with tracks by Oliver Ho, Outline and
James Ruskin.Is that stuff considered to be hard techno or tribal?
None of the above. Just techno (imho).
I've got the CD as well and find it very relaxing (with
On Fri, 13 Oct 2000, John Shipman wrote:
probably depends who your talking to. tribal' to one won't be tribal to
another. i find that lots of times the lines between the classifications of
this and that get blurred. you could definitely use both of these terms to
describe ho, outline and
