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

← back to listing · view thread

From:
Ben Knowles
To:
intelligent dunce music
Date:
Wed, 11 Apr 2001 14:17:09 -0600 (MDT)
Subject:
[idm] Re: Dissing Plaid??
Msg-Id:
<Pine.GSO.4.33.0104111358280.19409-100000@ucsub.colorado.edu>
In-Reply-To:
<987018358.10726.ezmlm@hyperreal.org>
Mbox:
idm.0104.gz
someone i disagree with said:
quoted 2 lines I think Plaid is generally boring, monotonous, repetitive and> I think Plaid is generally boring, monotonous, repetitive and > unoriginal. I lump them in the same category as Orbital.
hmmm, that's funny, i lump them in the same category as well, ie. electronic artists that actually make *music* as opposed to *bullshit wankery*. that is, they still understand the rudiments of composition and transition, harmony, builds, time signatures, key changes (GASP!), etc. maybe this isn't avant-garde enough for y'all, but it's a helluva lot more appealing to this listener's ears. btw, i find it infinitely amusing when people on this list equate musicality with "production" when referring to plaid. hell yeah they know how to produce a record. but the reason it sounds like it does (ie. good) is because they understand composition, not because it's "overproduced" or whatever. and hey, i'll be the first to admit that orbital's output has fallen somewhat in the past couple years, and that plaid can be pretty uneven at times as well (the second half of RPC). but at their best, both bands continue to impress with their use of new electronic sounds in more traditional song formats. well, traditional in a relative sense of course - it's not like we're talking verse-chorus-verse here. cheers, nub --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org