**DING DING** round 5: (this will all pass soon, folks)
quoted 13 lines If there are such strong ties between ambient and IDM (and I'd>> > If there are such strong ties between ambient and IDM (and I'd
>> >say that at least a few members of this list seem to think there is),
>> >why bother splitting the ambient list off into its own domain?
>>
>> I agree. I didn't do it! ;) I just subbed! ;) Hell there are
>> like 5 or 6 different "techno/house/ambient/IDM/dance/jungle" lists now,
>> and we've got to all expect some crossover... it's so hairsplitting...
>
> Well, yes and no. I'm on 313, IDM, Lowlands, Breaks, and
>UK-Dance, and I'd say they all fill very different niches. There's
>actually very little overlap among the 5. And I'm sure the same is
>true for the ambient list as well.
>
I disagree. Perhaps you think is no "overlap" as far as the actual
email POSTS themselves go, but in the music I think there is borrowing, for
sure. I believe you're wrong if you think all those styles don't borrow
elements from each other, acid used in a Red Planet record is the same
element of acid used in a Namlook track, just slower or timed differently.
IMHO, it's still acid. Many so called "ambient" acts are now using slow
breakbeat stuff, this is borrowing. Don't tell me that as soon as you add
a beat to an beatless ambient track it becomes IDM, either. "DUB" borrows
from everything and I won't even attempt to define that. Reggae, hip hop,
acid, and ambient. Nobody go out and make a "DUB" list now, either, ok?
:) But I gotta say no, at least *MY* records don't fall neatly and
cleanly into categories like yours seem to. Although I realize the email
posts do and should be categorized, to some extent, or we'd have one giant
chaotic list and people would get frustrated. I understand that. But
different music styles are originated by borrowing from other ones. I'll
argue that nothing, especially music, is just "hatched" pure and simple as
it's own art form, it depends on the history of what was born before it.
Now I will deal with your "Intelligent" comment:
quoted 2 lines 1) If some of the music I'm discussing is what I consider to> 1) If some of the music I'm discussing is what I consider to
>be "intelligent", I post it to IDM.
That's not so easy for me.
quoted 10 lines To paraphrase Damon Knight, "Intelligent dance music is what I> To paraphrase Damon Knight, "Intelligent dance music is what I
>point at when I say, 'This is intelligent dance music.'" I'm certainly
>not making either of the arguments you imply I might be making: I
>don't want to restrict the definition of IDM unduly, and I don't want
>to explode it to include everything. I know that there is a very
>definite thing or idea I _consider_ intelligent dance music, but I'm
>hard pressed to come up with a rigid definition of what that idea
>constitutes. I don't think there is one. I'm just trying to get some
>kind of discussion about what kinds of things we consider to
>constitute "intelligence" in dance music. If that makes any sense.
I'm sure this argument comes up all the time here on this list (and I don't
want to beat it to death), but
unless a track just leaves me dead, bored, and cold.... then I think it's
trying to say *something*, convey a feeling, or make me move. That's
"intelligent" as far as I'm concerned. "Sonic Sunset" [model 500] is one
of my favorite tracks ever, (I guess I'd call it techno),
and it's not just lying there spinning on a deck,
it's saying something to me, it's conveying a message or a feeling to
me, and that's "intellignce" to me. And it borrows a lot from jazz
and soul, but I'll spare their email lists this post. ;)
quoted 11 lines Like you said, I don't think we really disagree about anything> Like you said, I don't think we really disagree about anything
>here. I'm just trying to fumble my way towards defining some kind of
>techno aesthetic, even if I can't tell you exactly what techno _is_.
>
>philosophically yrz,
>ozy
>
> ozymandias G desiderata AKA Forrest L Norvell AKA DJ AladdinSane
>GCS/CW/DJ d- H++ s++:-- !g p1 !au a- w+++ v+++ C++(---) U?++++(----)$
> P--- L 3 E++ N++ K++ W---(-----) M++ V-- -po+ Y++>+++ t@ 5-
> jx R-- G'' !tv b+++ D++ B-- e++ u*(**) h-- f++ r++ n++ x+(*)
I appreciate the thoughtful debate, peace
_______________________________________________________________________
Matt MacQueen GROWTH.
Interface and Hypermedia Designer/Programmer
Communication Technology Laboratory, Michigan State Univeristy
_______________________________________________________________________