179,854Messages
9,130Senders
30Years
342mboxes

← back to listing · view thread

From:
To:
Cc:
Date:
Fri, 05 Nov 1999 16:55:35 -0800
Subject:
Re: (idm) warp 10 +1
Msg-Id:
<199911060055.QAA16319@screech.weirdnoise.com>
In-Reply-To:
<0.d3991527.2554c3e1@aol.com>
Mbox:
idm.9911.gz
TheevilD@aol.com wrote:
quoted 2 lines The widely varying opinions on this compilation (I guess) depend on the age> The widely varying opinions on this compilation (I guess) depend on the age > of the listener.
Could be. At 45, I'm pretty close to the oldest here. And I enjoyed it, though it's hardly going on steady rotation.
quoted 5 lines The people who like it (incl. Rob and Steve) are the ones who remember how> The people who like it (incl. Rob and Steve) are the ones who remember how > futuristic the tracks sounded when they first came out, or around then. They > have the mental 'image' of the track as sounding like the future, which > shines through even when faced with the fact that stylistically and > technologically most of the tracks have dated.
Here I must disagree. The tracks sound pretty dated to me--they sound nothing like the "future," wherever that is. But they still show plenty of inventiveness, overall. Perhaps it's that I've lived through enough stylistic permutations to not be obsessed with what's stylistically "current" as I once was. I can enjoy stuff for what it is, and only occasionally wince at the cliches. It's not a matter of revisiting a 1988 frame of mind--at least for me. It's just a matter of setting aside extra-musical concerns and listening. In a sense, the music cannot change, only me. I'm the one who can become "dated," not it. Here's a question for the list: what music being produced today won't sound equally dated ten years from now? -Ed --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org