Um. If you count "Trainer" and "Double Figure" (the CD which was actually being
referenced - wich apparently you haven't heard so can't judge), there are four CDs -
quite distinguishable in no uncertain terms. I'd say that even in the two I figure
you were talking about, there are substantial differences in sound and structure. And
you don't add a whole lot of credibility to your statements when you say further that
you find BDP very very similar unles maybe you've only heard "Spanners".
Without making any comment about the Ae side of this thread, I think it's interesting
that people often lose the wider context of pop music in general when discussing IDM
fodder. How else could you make the statement that Plaid doesn't have an avant garde
side? And when does what you are terming "avant garde" become something other? Not
knocking Ae, but it certainly isn't like we haven't heard that style yet.
jeff
"Brian M. Cass" wrote:
quoted 16 lines HOLY SMOKES
> HOLY SMOKES
> This guy blasts ae then goes on to laud Plaid? Plaid whose two cds are
> nearly indistinguishable from each other and are very very similar to
> their black dog stuff?!?!?!?
> Plaid who don't really have an inventive, avant garde bone in their body?
>
> On Tue, 10 Apr 2001 muziq@ionet.net wrote:
>
> > > ...are much more
> > > interesting, and Confield should top them all.
> >
> > Because?
> >
> > I've been listening to the white labels for a bit, and while COnfield is in
> > that progression Ae has been on about over the last few years, don't go for the
> > future-tense hype... --
jeff
?/~THINK OUTSIDE OF YOUR SITCOM~\!
ICQ904008 (but I'm never on)
---->
http://www.freedonation.com (costs you nothing. try it)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org
For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org