IDM Mailing Archive

I am having a hard time believing that so many have listened to this album and have been so preoccupied with something else that they fail to hear the absolute depth that each track on this album offers. In my opinion, if anyone were to listen to this album carefully, they would find more textures of sounds, melodies and beats than any other IDM album released this year. There is SO MUCH to each track that even multiple concentrated listenings do not reveal everything. It is not often that an album by ANY artist _rewards_ you for multiple listenings. I call it a reward because any lover of music appreciates when a song surprises you and pleases your brain when you first listen to it. If a song can do that repeatedly, it is superior. And who's saying that because 'Mommy' likes it that we should accept it as a quality album? One quick note about the commercialism aspect... It seems to me that many IDM'ers get a certain disease that keeps them from enjoying any artist or album after it breaks into mainstream listening. I wonder what the response to this album would have been if it came out a few years ago when Orbital was still techno's little secret, unknown on the MTV and alternative radio circuit. I think many of you know the answer. Is it really that hard for some people to believe that an album can be _so good_ that, with the right marketing nudge, it can break into different markets for more people to enjoy? What's so despicable about that? ARM/Ren On Now: In Sides -- I just had to put it on after reading about the album for 20 minutes. It's kind of like when people talk about food, you have a tendency to get really hungry, especially if it's just before meal time...

In a message dated 09/01/97 16:54:31, you write:

quoted 1 line I wonder what the response to this album would have been if it came out a

> I wonder what the response to this album would have been if it came out a

few

quoted 1 line years ago when Orbital was still techno's little secret, unknown on the

> years ago when Orbital was still techno's little secret, unknown on the

MTV

quoted 1 line and alternative radio circuit.

> and alternative radio circuit.

That's funny, I recall a band with a somewhat similar name and hairstyles performing their debut single on Top Of The Pops, though of course it couldn't have been Orbital, as they are, as you say, 'techno's little secret'.

quoted 1 line I think many of you know the answer.

> I think many of you know the answer.

Yeah, I probably would have liked it quite a lot, though not as much as early material like Chime and Analogue Test Feb.90. But having said that, what goes for technology goes for techno music too.

quoted 1 line Is it really that hard for some people to believe that an album can be _so

> Is it really that hard for some people to believe that an album can be _so

good_

quoted 2 lines that, with the right marketing nudge, it can break into different markets

> that, with the right marketing nudge, it can break into different markets > for more people to enjoy? What's so despicable about that?

What's so despicable about saying 'this is outdated psychedelic rave music, all ornament and no substance'? On Now? Sounds Fresh - Roni Size/Reprazent

quoted 5 lines What's so despicable about saying 'this is outdated psychedelic rave music,

>> What's so despicable about saying 'this is outdated psychedelic rave music, >> all ornament and no substance'? > > Just out of curiousity, what makes a musical piece full of > "substance"?

If he likes it, or if the Unwashed Heathen Masses Which Are Much Stupider Than Him don't, it has "substance". Otherwise . . . Someone call me when HumanerrOr figures out that liking things because they're poopular and *not* liking things because they're popular are exactly the same thing . . . -- ::: Lazlo (lazlo@swcp.com; http://www.swcp.com/lazlo)