> no, what i was saying is it's far too easy and too common
> for people to rope in any hard minimalism with mills' stuff
> from a few years back when he was the world's finest.
> 'growth' is good for everyone but why when mills is now making
> superb deep stuff and not so exceptional dancefloor music is all club
stuff
> compared to his...time for people to realise he has moved on too with his
> productions.
>
> if you're gonna compare then do so with the likes of ruskin, female &
> regis, surgeon etc as their music is much closer to the album but then
> again they're not from detroit so that probably isn't allowed.
>
> innercity
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Cyclone Wehner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 313 Detroit <313@hyperreal.org>
> Sent: Monday, April 16, 2001 3:14 PM
> Subject: Re: [313] DJ Shufflemaster, Fenton, San
>
>
> > Actually, coming from a 'journalist', 'Millsian' is a very fluid term -
it
> > doesn't mean hard techno, it means what it says.
> >
> > Also, people move on to new things. It's called 'growth'. :)
> >
> > >no real standouts probably but every track is usable in a
> > >harder set. and as for emulating mills i just wish he was
> > >making good hard music aswell these days and not the
> > >rubbish that's been out on purpose maker recently.
> > >lazy journalism (sorry tom) and done by so many, to
> > >describe hard minimal techno as "like mills, millsian" etc.
> > >more like mills plays than actually makes.
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
>
