IDM Mailing Archive

1995-01-23 23:13Sasha Kipervargozy wrote: > Especially if we are quite clear about what we, as listeners, >do and do not

From:: Sasha Kipervarg <sasha@tiac.com>
To:: <313@lazarus.uta.edu>, <idm@hyperreal.com>, <lowlands@xs4all.nl>
Date:: Mon, 23 Jan 1995 18:13:48 -0500
Subject:: Re: (313) We need more serious criticism of techno! (long rant)

ozy wrote:

quoted 17 lines Especially if we are quite clear about what we, as listeners,

> Especially if we are quite clear about what we, as listeners, >do and do not like about what we're hearing. The vast majority of >reviews of dance music completely miss the point. I don't know how >many of you have ever seen an issue of Base 10 (pronounced "base >twelve"), but the reviews I've seen there are typical of reviews I see >everywhere in the dance music press: heavy on the superlatives, very >little actual discussion of the music's elements and textures, very >little space given to stuff that fails (and, concomitantly, very >little discussion of _why_ it sucks), and numerical judgements that >often seem to vary widely from a reviewer's stated opinion of the >track. They review absolute shitpiles of stuff, but they give it all >such cursory treatment that they needn't have bothered. Stated another >way, since they only seem to review stuff that they like, and their >reviews all read pretty much the same, the only real way they tell you >the value of the recording is by putting its review in the zine! (I >only single them out because they have a net presence and therefore my >criticisms of them might serve some constructive purpose.)

Hmmm. Okay. I think I'm the only Base 10'er here on IDM, so I'll respond. I just went back and read an old issue of the zine and here's what I think: Yes, the reviews sometimes come down to: "its fuckin cool" or "you are an idiot if you don't get this". BUT, I can tell you that when Spike and Larry write that they actually mean it. They do that cause they love the music. Sometimes the reviews they write are more creative than most of the stuff I see here on the net. In any case, I cant speak for them, so I will speak for myself. I do the writing for nothing. I do it to let other people out there know what is good. I don't have the time to waste on writing reviews for shit tracks. I buy everything I review so unless I get it for free, which is _never_, I won't review it. When I do reviews, I sit down and make a conscious effort to write exactly what I feel about a track. The size and cost of the printing restricts all writers to a paragraph or two. We don't have the time, money or energy to write lenghty reviews articulating how and why a track sucked or why it moved us to tears.

quoted 4 lines Good reviews should communicate effectively to someone who hasnever heard a >given piec

>Good reviews should communicate effectively to someone who hasnever heard a >given piece of music a little bit of the flavor of the >work. It helps if you can avoid comparisons to things that your >"average" listener hasn't heard, although comparisons can be very >useful.

Base 10 is aimed at the average "dance" buyer. I don't think it will be given away at the nearest highbrow Waldenbooks location. And what wrong with buzzwords? Isn't techno a buzzword? How about trance? How about Triphop? Buzzwords make writing exciting and give my writing some depth. Thats just the way I express myself. Personally, I *hate* reading lengthy reviews. After reading so many "this release moved my soul to the point of ectasy" reviews, my perspective is to keep it short, simple and sometimes, funny.

quoted 1 line They should be concise and avoid buzzwords.

>They should be concise and avoid buzzwords.

Concise? From Merriam Websters Dictionary: Con-cise - free from all elaboration and superfluous. I think "this track sucks" (as Spike or Larry) would say is as concise as it gets. True, sometimes that come off as obnoxious, but I respect them for having the honesty and courage to say that a track sucks or that the rave scene is shit. I cant say that for all people out here.

quoted 3 lines They should be

>They should be >information-rich and follow the normal rules of grammar. Look at the >reviews of books in the NYT Review of Books.

I'll be sure to buy a New York Times styleguide the next time I do my reviews. ; ) ---stuff deleted---

quoted 3 lines Does the constant subliminal link between IDM and drugs (the

>Does the constant subliminal link between IDM and drugs (the >assumption that IDM is somehow improved by the consumption of >psychotropics) bug anybody besides me?

I agree with you here. It annoyed me so much I stopped spinning and supporting the "rave" scene. If you need something else to enhance your appreciation of techno, I think you must be missing something in your life. A lot of people at raves "glamorize" drugs and I find that disgusting. BUT, It comes down to this: its their body and they have the right to do whatever they want with it. If they think dropping some acid gives them a richer understanding of "idm", its their right. The music is all I will ever need.

quoted 4 lines Why do people politely ignore James from Drexciya or Mad

>Why do people politely ignore James from Drexciya or Mad >Mike Banks when they start going off on the white establishment? Even >if you agree with them, don't you have some kind of reaction to their >words?

Somehow, while I agree with his perspective of the white establishment, I dont think he realizes that for some of us, his skin color and where he is from means nothing. I _dont_ see the world in black and white. And when I buy Drexciya or Plasticman records, I don't think, "Gee Ritchie is a cool white kid" or "Damn, that Drexciya is some cool black shit". Sounds to me like he cares as much about a person's skin color as a redneck with a hood does.

quoted 4 lines All right, I've spewed enough. The only reason I bring all of

>All right, I've spewed enough. The only reason I bring all of >this up is because I'd like to see more meaningful discussion about >what is one of the central elements of my life. There's a hell of a >lot more to techno than trainspottin.

Well, I for one am glad you brought all this up, even though I'm still wincing from the Base 10 critique. And on that note, let me say there's a lot more to life than techno. I'm going out for a walk.. sash

1995-01-24 02:33ozymandias G desiderataThere's enough here for two different replies, so I'm splitting them up. Sasha defends Bas

From:: ozymandias G desiderata <ogd@selway.umt.edu>
To:: Sasha Kipervarg <sasha@tiac.com>
Cc:: <313@lazarus.uta.edu>, <idm@hyperreal.com>, <lowlands@xs4all.nl>, <spikepx@aol.com>
Date:: Mon, 23 Jan 95 19:33:05 -0700
Subject:: In Defense of _Base 10_
Reply to:: Re: (313) We need more serious criticism of techno! (long rant)

There's enough here for two different replies, so I'm splitting them up. Sasha defends Base 10:

quoted 5 lines Hmmm. Okay. I think I'm the only Base 10'er here on IDM, so I'll respond. I

> Hmmm. Okay. I think I'm the only Base 10'er here on IDM, so I'll respond. I= > just went back and read an old issue of the zine and here's what I think: = > Yes, the reviews sometimes come down to: "its fuckin cool" or "you are an= > idiot if you don't get this". BUT, I can tell you that when Spike and Larry= > write that they actually mean it.

I have absolutely no doubt that this is the case. Note that I didn't say that I don't like Base 10. I do, in fact, and I thank you for giving me the chance to see them. Base 10's reviews are far superior to most of the crappy reviews I read in StreetSound or DJ. But I also think that it has a lot of room for improvement.

quoted 1 line They do that cause they love the music.=

> They do that cause they love the music.=

Again, I have no quibbles with that. Their love for music is what shows most clearly in the reviews.

quoted 2 lines Sometimes the reviews they write are more creative than most of the stuff I=

> Sometimes the reviews they write are more creative than most of the stuff I= > see here on the net.

Except, of course, for the ones that we _have_ seen on the net, of course, right? Such as, say, your own reviews? I would stick a smiley in there, but I'm trying to cut the habit.

quoted 4 lines In any case, I cant speak for them, so I will speak=

> In any case, I cant speak for them, so I will speak= > for myself. I do the writing for nothing. I do it to let other people out= > there know what is good. I don't have the time to waste on writing reviews= > for shit=20tracks.

Here's where I feel that I have a little room to argue with you. I think that negative reviews are just as valuable as positive ones. If I ever lay my hands on any stinkeroos, I'll be sure to let everybody here know about it. In fact, I think that picking out examples of things that fail miserably are just as important as finding the things that are especially good. Both give artists fairly clear pointers as to what direction they should be taking what they're working on. Especially when the failures, like Lassigue Bendthaus' recent album (just to pick one recent example) are so close to being something new and exceptional.

quoted 6 lines I buy everything I review so unless I get it for free,=

> I buy everything I review so unless I get it for free,= > which is _never_, I won't review it. When I do reviews, I sit down and make= > a conscious effort to write exactly what I feel about a track. The size and= > cost of the printing restricts all writers to a paragraph or two. We don't= > have the time, money or energy to write lenghty reviews articulating how= > and why a track sucked or why it moved us to tears.

See, Base 10 seems to be on the "quantity" end of the the "quantity<---->quality" scale. I'd prefer it if Base 10's reviewers slowed down a little bit and went into depth on things, especially things that excite the reviewer and strike him / her as being something innovative. As it is, you all seem so breathless all the time. There's no way you can possibly keep up with _all_ of the new releases, so why not concentrate on the very best of the best?

quoted 14 lines Good reviews should communicate effectively to someone who hasnever heard a=

> >Good reviews should communicate effectively to someone who hasnever heard a= > >given piece of music a little bit of the flavor of the > >work. It helps if you can avoid comparisons to things that your > >"average" listener hasn't heard, although comparisons can be very > >useful. > > Base 10 is aimed at the average "dance" buyer. I don't think it will be= > given away at the nearest highbrow Waldenbooks location. And what wrong= > with buzzwords? Isn't techno a buzzword? How about trance? How about= > Triphop? Buzzwords make writing exciting and give my writing some depth.= > Thats just the way I express myself. Personally, I *hate* reading lengthy= > reviews. After reading so many "this release moved my soul to the point of= > ectasy" reviews, my perspective is to keep it short, simple and sometimes,= > funny.=20

Shit, man, I'm not asking for everybody to write reviews that will be up for next year's Pulitzer. I just would like to see a little more depth and more qualitative discussion of what makes a track / 12" / EP / LP / compilation strong or weak. I agree with you that there's a lot of overwrought reviews that try to convince you that if you buy this or that release you _will_ see God. I don't want that any more than you do. And it's possible to do exactly what I'm talking about in a couple of paragraphs. That's what I strive for in my reviews, at least.

quoted 9 lines They should be concise and avoid buzzwords.

> >They should be concise and avoid buzzwords. > > Concise? > > >From Merriam Websters Dictionary: Con-cise - free from all elaboration and= > superfluous.=20 > > I think "this track sucks" (as Spike or Larry) would say is as concise as it= > gets.

I think that's somewhere beyond concise.

quoted 3 lines True, sometimes that come off as obnoxious, but I respect them for=

> True, sometimes that come off as obnoxious, but I respect them for= > having the honesty and courage to say that a track sucks or that the rave= > scene is shit. I cant say that for all people out here.

I'll give them the respect they're due for that, but I'm also going to push them to take what they're doing to the next level. Nobody engaged in an artistic or critical enterprise should ever be fully comfortable with where they are; they should always want to be somewhere beyond where they are. At least in my little ideal world of discourse.

quoted 6 lines They should be

> >They should be > >information-rich and follow the normal rules of grammar. Look at the > >reviews of books in the NYT Review of Books. > > I'll be sure to buy a New York Times styleguide the next time I do my= > reviews. ; )

Thhbt! I'm merely putting forward one _possible_ model of reviewing here, cheese. Don't you think it would be cool if there were at least one place where you could read techno reviews that were of the same caliber as the book reviews in the NYT Review of Books? Think about it. In conclusion, I'd like to say that I think Base 10 is a cool little zine, and I don't want to trash Spike and Larry's hard work. If any of you have been wondering what the hell Sasha and I have been going on about, you owe it to yourselves to find out more about both Base 10 and Planet X (which is the excellent record store Base 10 originates out of). I'd just like to see somebody raise the bar as far as reviewing goes. I'd do it myself if I wasn't so damn busy. yrz, ozy ozymandias G desiderata AKA Forrest L Norvell AKA DJ AladdinSane GCS/CW/DJ d- H++ s++:-- !g p1 !au a- w+++ v+++ C++(---) U?++++(----)$ P--- L 3 E++ N++ K++ W---(-----) M++ V-- -po+ Y++>+++ t@ 5- jx R-- G'' !tv b+++ D++ B-- e++ u*(**) h-- f++ r++ n++ x+(*)

In Defense of _Base 10_