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

← back to listing · view thread

From:
multipara
To:
Date:
Tue, 31 May 1994 16:05:49 +0100
Subject:
waveform transmissions (was: techno art theory)
Msg-Id:
<9405311401.AA08472@techno.Stanford.EDU>
Mbox:
idm.9405.gz
on sat, 28 may 1994 00:42:53 +0100, chris (u90cmg@ecs.ox.ac.uk) asked:
quoted 2 lines hmm is the general concensus that w. trans V.1 is a quality album?>hmm is the general concensus that w. trans V.1 is a quality album? >i auditioned it and thought it sounded ... boring?
it's a wonderful album, one of the few techno records that made their way outside the techno community. would be better without the "changes of live" track. it might sound boring because it uses the same motifs all through the record. the effect of this is such though that some people have likened it to a novel. in other words, it's an album, not a mere compilation of tracks. play this on good equipment. the first two tracks alone are worth the purchase. pete ashdown has done the definitive review, available at t.s.e. on fri, 27 may 94 18:58:23 est, Sho Kuwamoto <sho@physics.purdue.edu> asked:
quoted 1 line Speaking of which... Does someone feel like reviewing WT Vol 2?>Speaking of which... Does someone feel like reviewing WT Vol 2?
yup. i might. let's see... maybe i'll do this together with wt vol 3, which is due any minute (don't know exactly when, maybe it's even out already), and which is again by jeff mills. vol 2 was by rob wood. now i ask: the previous discussion gave the impression that x-103 was by jeff mills *alone*. is this really true? i thought it was by him, rob wood, and i believe yet another guy. can anyone give a definite line-up for x-101, x-102 and x-103? peace, p.