IDM Mailing Archive

Che, C >Sometimes I wonder if certain people really love the music or if they C >just love wielding obscure facts about the people making the music. I don't understand. A bunch of people asked who made the woodenspoon record, and they get attacked! I don't think the name of an artist who produced a record really constitutes an OBSCURE fact. Hell, I'd like to know myself, after 10 seconds I said 'Oh, another Aphex record...', though even I could be wrong. C >Maybe it's time to go back to reading idm-reviews. Personally I couldn't care less about most of the reviews. Why should I care about what some [Generic overhyped superstar rave act] fan thinks of Squarepusher? Or whether someone thinks something is 'good' or 'sucks', or Roni Size is 'a follower, not a leader' (what nonsense!). Reviewers should try to describe what the music is like objectively and in creative rather than generic terms, because generic terms mean different things from one person to the next. I can't remember who wrote it, but the review of Bubble And Squeak which went on at length about ninjas in battle or something, now THAT'S what I call a good review :) But, no matter how good reviews are, at the end of the day, I'm still going to have to actually LISTEN to this stuff before I buy it. Discussing Aphex's equipment list is of FAR more value IMHO. Cheers, SjaY. *Fido* 2:250/151 *E-Mail* Geotrax@jukjoint.warp.co.uk ... 'Artifax' - Stasis ___ * UniQWK v4.1 * The Windows Mail Reader

On Fri, 16 Aug 1996, GEOTRAX wrote:

quoted 4 lines .....

> ..... > Reviewers should try to describe what the music is like objectively and > in creative rather than generic terms, because generic terms mean > different things from one person to the next. ...

Hmmmm, interesting opinion. I always thought that reviews were supposed to be subjective (after all, it is *one* person's opinion and that person might hate everything you like (or vice versa, or some things, ad infinitum)). Also, objective terms might mean something different to different people (I've often heard stuff described as hard, or noisy, or metallic, or psychedelic, or whatever and *their* definition of the term doesn't even come close to *my* perception of that term's definition). Anyway, enuf of that rant.....

quoted 3 lines ...

> ... > Discussing Aphex's equipment list is of FAR more value IMHO. > ...

Why? I'm asking this seriously - why would a list of AT's gear be more interesting to you than reading about what people have to say about records (even if you disagree with *all* the opinions)? cya brian WP: On-U Sound's newest collection (15 years.....)

Che, C >Sometimes I wonder if certain people really love the music or if they C >just love wielding obscure facts about the people making the music. I don't understand. A bunch of people asked who made the woodenspoon record, and they get attacked! I don't think the name of an artist who produced a record really constitutes an OBSCURE fact. Hell, I'd like to know myself, after 10 seconds I said 'Oh, another Aphex record...', though even I could be wrong. C >Maybe it's time to go back to reading idm-reviews. Personally I couldn't care less about most of the reviews. Why should I care about what some [Generic overhyped superstar rave act] fan thinks of Squarepusher? Or whether someone thinks something is 'good' or 'sucks', or Roni Size is 'a follower, not a leader' (what nonsense!). Reviewers should try to describe what the music is like objectively and in creative rather than generic terms, because generic terms mean different things from one person to the next. I can't remember who wrote it, but the review of Bubble And Squeak which went on at length about ninjas in battle or something, now THAT'S what I call a good review :) But, no matter how good reviews are, at the end of the day, I'm still going to have to actually LISTEN to this stuff before I buy it. Discussing Aphex's equipment list is of FAR more value IMHO. Cheers, SjaY. *Fido* 2:250/151 *E-Mail* Geotrax@jukjoint.warp.co.uk ... 'Artifax' - Stasis ___ * UniQWK v4.1 * The Windows Mail Reader

O4thworld, O >>Discussing Aphex's equipment list is of FAR more value IMHO. [than what someone thought of x or y record on z label] O >I ldread the day when we are all reduced to equipment/notebook spotting. Reduced to what? It's not spotting for everyone, or even the vast majority of people, I would like to know what equipment is being used because that's information that's damn useful to ME as someone interested in making music. The idea that people go to shows and jot down blah blah patch bay blah Roland etc in the same manner as someone who spots trains is generally a myth. Cheers, SjaY. *Fido* 2:250/151 *E-Mail* Geotrax@jukjoint.warp.co.uk ___ * UniQWK v4.1 * The Windows Mail Reader