Humanerr0r@aol.com wrote:
quoted 6 lines My Tenor assertion was based on the idea that _Intervision_ is not
>
> > My Tenor assertion was based on the idea that _Intervision_ is not
> > evolutionary, rather it was retreading old ground, and not in a
> > particularly imaginative way.
>
> Why are you trying to make this out as a bad thing?
I never said it was a bad thing, I said it wasn't an IDM thing. Talk
about missing the point!
quoted 3 lines Smoker's Delight wasn't at all cutting edge, but I and (I hope)
> Smoker's Delight wasn't at all cutting edge, but I and (I hope)
> many people consider that to be one of their most enduring and worthwhile
> releases, simply because it is great music that makes you feel *good*.
That may be, but I can't remember the last time anyone mentioned
Nightmares On Wax here.
The point of my post was *not* that I don't like Jimi Tenor (though that
happens to be true, at least what I've heard so far). It was that I
couldn't figure out why so many people on the IDM list thought it was
relevant, because I could find very little in it to recommend it to
people who are into the music that is regularly discussed on the list.
quoted 3 lines In other words, it used precious little of the vocabulary
> > In other words, it used precious little of the vocabulary
>
> You mean the cliches or the superficial production techniques?
No, I mean more abstract things like "feel," "style" and "attitude," not
"this kind of machine" or "that kind of noise" (or even "on that
label"). _Intervision_ doesn't "feel" like an IDM release, no matter
what it's made of.
quoted 5 lines Electronic music has no vocabulary, and I'm sure you'll be angry when I say
> Electronic music has no vocabulary, and I'm sure you'll be angry when I say
> that Jimi Tenor is just the same as the Aphex Twin, who is just the same as
> Miles Davis who is just the same as Ennio Morricone - good music, and that's
> all people should be concerning themselves with, not this societal little
> clique small-mindedness about music where everyone plays by the media rules.
I'm never angry (except when someone tells me "your opinion is invalid;"
that always gets me good and riled-up :-). I concern myself with plenty
of good music, but I don't discuss it all in front of IDM unless I think
that you all might enjoy it. As much as I like the new Prince triple CD
or the latest Offspring release, they don't use enough of the
"vocabulary" of IDM to make them relevant here, so I didn't review them
here. If I bought _Intervision_ and liked it as much as those releases,
I *still* wouldn't bring it up here.
The thing that bothers me most is that you seem to think there's a
universal meaning to the phrase "good music," and I dispute that,
because in my mind, Aphex Twin is good music and Jimi Tenor is not.
That doesn't make me small-minded, it just means my taste differs from
yours. Besides, this is not the "good music" list, it's the IDM list.
Loads of stuff discussed here does not fit my taste, which is to be
expected, but at least I can see why they're here. I can't see why Jimi
Tenor is here.
My point about vocabulary means that when I go to the Atlas section of
the bookstore, I don't expect to find "Microserfs." You might be able
to make the argument that it's a good book, but it still doesn't have
the "feel" of what I expect in the Atlas section. I'll look at it and
think, "That doesn't really belong here." Same with Jimi Tenor.
quoted 4 lines To say we can only discuss music that falls within certain boundaries,
> To say we can only discuss music that falls within certain boundaries,
> leaving the rest outside forever, only whispered quietly in passing, is, to
> me, a load of crap, and you're kidding yourself if you think you can get away
> with it.
Just because the boundaries are constantly moving doesn't mean they're
not there. The list doesn't discuss the latest Offspring album because
that's not what the list is about. When _Exit_Planet_Dust_ came out, it
was IDM, but nowadays a lot of people don't seem to think it is. This
is proof that over time, the boundaries become different, but the
subject is the same.
I'm not suggesting that you shouldn't discuss whatever you want, but
that means that I reserve the right to point out that _Intervisions_ has
very little going for it with regards to the current meaning of IDM,
whatever it is. I don't see how, even in the forseeable future, the
meaning of IDM will expand to include stuff like _Intervisions_ because
of reasons I've already pointed out. Why have a list called IDM if
you're just going to discuss everything under the sun?
quoted 9 lines but so far
> > but so far
> > the only arguments I've heard in favor of Tenor's IDM-ness is that (a)
> > it's "good" (which really can't be the basis for any list because it's
> > way too subjective to be useful)
>
> <holding head in hands>
>
> Maybe we should start up the 'objective' list, where everybody likes and
> hates the same things. According to you this should be quite easy.
?!?!?! An "objective" list would be the exact opposite of what you
wrote.
When I see "idm" in the header, I want to have some idea of what will be
in the contents; otherwise it's a totally useless distinction. That
emphatically doesn't mean that I want everything to adhere to a strict
set of criteria; there has to be room for the "vocabulary" to evolve and
mutate. My ears are wide open to a ridiculous amount of musical ideas,
and I'm all for a widely-inclusive definition of IDM, but I still can't
for the life of me figure out why _Intervisions_ is part of it, or how
it will become so in the future. Is that short-sighted? Maybe, but no
one has produced a compelling enough argument to help me get over it.
--
Adam J Weitzman
Individual, Inc. "Are we here?"
weitzman@individual.com - Orbital
http://www.individual.com