IDM Mailing Archive

On Fri, 13 Jul 2001 Adam Piontek pointed out:

quoted 7 lines

> http://tigerbeat6.com/cex/news01/cnews060501.htm > http://tigerbeat6.com/cex/news01/cnews061201.htm > > You gotta read 'em both in order. Provides some > interesting insight into the Warp leadership. It > seems to me that Warp comes out on top here, but some > pretty good points all around.

Yeah great... every label should sign release hiphop artists. There's not enough rap out there already. Everyone loves rap ($$$). .`-). christopher miller o o.' evil@oasis.net == ' --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

I too would absolutely hate to see Warp turn to a rap/hip hop label. Cex was complaining that Warp doesn't put out stuff for regular people. Why is that such a bad thing? Besides, we all know regular people aren't any good right? j/k, but heres a lame ass joke I came up with on Soulseek yesterday How many non idm-list(n)ers does it take to screw in a light bulb? a) Who cares, they can go fuck themselves. b) We'll never know, they'll always be in the dark. Lentic Cathresis kicks ass On Fri, 13 Jul 2001, Christopher Miller wrote:

quoted 23 lines On Fri, 13 Jul 2001 Adam Piontek pointed out:

> On Fri, 13 Jul 2001 Adam Piontek pointed out: > > > http://tigerbeat6.com/cex/news01/cnews060501.htm > > http://tigerbeat6.com/cex/news01/cnews061201.htm > > > > You gotta read 'em both in order. Provides some > > interesting insight into the Warp leadership. It > > seems to me that Warp comes out on top here, but some > > pretty good points all around. > > Yeah great... every label should sign release hiphop artists. There's > not enough rap out there already. Everyone loves rap ($$$). > > .`-). > christopher miller o o.' > evil@oasis.net == > ' > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org > For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org >

--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

on 7/13/01 8:05 PM, Brian M. Cass at kingmob@nmt.edu wrote:

quoted 1 line Lentic Cathresis kicks ass

> Lentic Cathresis kicks ass

I think it's funny that since I have gotten this album, and I have started to use max/msp, I have really enjoyed listening to Confield and started to listen to LP5 again. I really don't get why so many can say they dig on LP5 but can't listen to Confield. Confield is just taking what they were doing on LP5 even deeper. I love this album more than ever. NP:pachinko Peter "Pachinko" Schrock Ý - http://www.mp3.com/pachinko - --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

Peter Schrock wrote:

quoted 10 lines on 7/13/01 8:05 PM, Brian M. Cass at kingmob@nmt.edu wrote:

> on 7/13/01 8:05 PM, Brian M. Cass at kingmob@nmt.edu wrote: > >> Lentic Cathresis kicks ass > > I think it's funny that since I have gotten this album, and I have started > to use max/msp, I have really enjoyed listening to Confield and started to > listen to LP5 again. I really don't get why so many can say they dig on > LP5 but can't listen to Confield. Confield is just taking what they were > doing on LP5 even deeper. I love this album more than ever. > NP:pachinko

I don't know... Lentic Catachresis I find to be excessively boring after the 3 minute mark. Granted the changeup is unexpected and amazing at first listen, but it continues on for a painful 6 and half minutes with little to no change whatsoever rhythmically, texturally or melodically which is a contrast to the rest of the ablum. Granted there's this creepy chord progression buried deep in the mix that changes back and forth, but no more than that. The worst thing is it would be more tolerable in its minimal setting if the beat/rhythm was at least comprehendable, but it isn't. It's just uninteresting and doesn't evolve.. On a completely rhetorical note, though, the way I see that song shaped out is that Rob and Sean set it up to self generate and it accidentally exploded on itself and changed into a completely different song unintentionally. In terms of digital generative song writing, that's creepy and throws new light on the song, making it conceptually (though not musically) more interesting. -mark

on 7/13/01 10:35 PM, Mark at mef@ecst.csuchico.edu wrote:

quoted 5 lines I don't know... Lentic Catachresis I find to be excessively boring after

> I don't know... Lentic Catachresis I find to be excessively boring after > the 3 minute mark. Granted the changeup is unexpected and amazing at > first listen, but it continues on for a painful 6 and half minutes with > little to no change whatsoever rhythmically, texturally or melodically > which is a contrast to the rest of the ablum.

That's fine, that is why we have the privilege of being entitled to our own opinions. I can understand why people don't like Autechre's direction, for me, it's very fascinating.

quoted 6 lines Granted there's this

> Granted there's this > creepy chord progression buried deep in the mix that changes back and > forth, but no more than that. The worst thing is it would be more > tolerable in its minimal setting if the beat/rhythm was at least > comprehendable, but it isn't. It's just uninteresting and doesn't evolve.. >

You know, there are a couple of other songs even more boring than this one, like Uviol and Bine, but it's still all creative.

quoted 4 lines On a completely rhetorical note, though, the way I see that song shaped

> On a completely rhetorical note, though, the way I see that song shaped > out is that Rob and Sean set it up to self generate and it accidentally > exploded on itself and changed into a completely different song > unintentionally.

Actually, they mentioned in an interview that I read that they will come up with something and let it play for hours while doing something else. I think that is what they were doing, play... oops, okay, lets stop it now. You know what I mean?

quoted 3 lines In terms of digital generative song writing, that's

> In terms of digital generative song writing, that's > creepy and throws new light on the song, making it conceptually (though > not musically) more interesting.

I don't know, I mean, you would really have to know what you are doing (musically) to get it to sound anything listenable. Granted, a lot of people think it's not, but the more I listen to it, the more I understand it. Some people may never get it, but I truly believe that this music will eventually be played on the radio in 10 to 20 years from now. At least something close to it and we will all be listening to something even more fucked up than this. LOL. Peter "Pachinko" Schrock Ý - http://www.mp3.com/pachinko - --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

From: Mark <mef@ecst.csuchico.edu>

quoted 5 lines I don't know... Lentic Catachresis I find to be excessively boring after

> I don't know... Lentic Catachresis I find to be excessively boring after > the 3 minute mark. Granted the changeup is unexpected and amazing at > first listen, but it continues on for a painful 6 and half minutes with > little to no change whatsoever rhythmically, texturally or melodically > which is a contrast to the rest of the ablum.

Perhaps that's deliberate, as it's the last track?

quoted 2 lines tolerable in its minimal setting if the beat/rhythm was at least

> tolerable in its minimal setting if the beat/rhythm was at least > comprehendable, but it isn't. It's just uninteresting and doesn't

evolve.. Hmmm, it doesn't evolve but I don't find it uninteresting. I like the rhythmic texture and the digital hiccups. Again I think it might well have something to do with the fact that it closes the album. I notice that there seems to be a divide between people who like texture for its own sake and those who don't. It's true that I'm one of those people who can quite happily listen to a sustaining synth patch for 10 minutes at a time and get interested in the microscopic quirks of the sound. I explore this kind of thing a lot with my own gear but I rarely record it - timbral instability for its own sake seems to be such an unpopular subset of electronic music that frankly I don't want to get a load of emails going 'this is just boring noise' like I did last time :-) Anig Browl _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

Peter Schrock wrote:

quoted 10 lines I don't know... Lentic Catachresis I find to be excessively boring after

>> I don't know... Lentic Catachresis I find to be excessively boring after >> the 3 minute mark. Granted the changeup is unexpected and amazing at >> first listen, but it continues on for a painful 6 and half minutes with >> little to no change whatsoever rhythmically, texturally or melodically >> which is a contrast to the rest of the ablum. > > > That's fine, that is why we have the privilege of being entitled to our own > opinions. I can understand why people don't like Autechre's direction, for > me, it's very fascinating.

Whoa... don't get me wrong here. I absolutely love this new album! It's texturally the most brilliant thing I've heard in a long time, and the subtlety of the melodies makes them more amazing. Songs like cfern, pen expers and eidetic casein are some of the more brilliant autechre songs I've ever heard. I just don't appreciate the complete LACK of textural change that is apparent in only the last 6 minutes of lentic. Just listen... start it around 3:45 minutes in, and quickly switch it to about 8 minutes in. No melodic change, not even texturally, no rhythmic change, just a constantly random, yet ordered barrage of beats. Now while I enjoy those sounds, I don't enjoy them not progressing, that's all.

quoted 8 lines Granted there's this

>> Granted there's this >> creepy chord progression buried deep in the mix that changes back and >> forth, but no more than that. The worst thing is it would be more >> tolerable in its minimal setting if the beat/rhythm was at least >> comprehendable, but it isn't. It's just uninteresting and doesn't evolve... >> > You know, there are a couple of other songs even more boring than this one, > like Uviol and Bine, but it's still all creative.

Uviol progresses quite a bit, the percussion changes up and becomes harder, smaller higher pitched more digital sounding melodies sneak in, and the lead reverberated synth, the melody that drives the song, seems to change keys every minute or so. It's an excellent example of minimalism and texture executed very well and stays entertaining.

quoted 9 lines On a completely rhetorical note, though, the way I see that song shaped

>> On a completely rhetorical note, though, the way I see that song shaped >> out is that Rob and Sean set it up to self generate and it accidentally >> exploded on itself and changed into a completely different song >> unintentionally. > > Actually, they mentioned in an interview that I read that they will come up > with something and let it play for hours while doing something else. I > think that is what they were doing, play... oops, okay, lets stop it now. > You know what I mean?

Doesn't surprise me one bit. I just wished they had stopped the song at the 4 minute mark instead... giving about 1-2 minutes for the changeup, it would have made a much better flowing piece.

quoted 12 lines In terms of digital generative song writing, that's

>> In terms of digital generative song writing, that's >> creepy and throws new light on the song, making it conceptually (though >> not musically) more interesting. > > > I don't know, I mean, you would really have to know what you are doing > (musically) to get it to sound anything listenable. Granted, a lot of > people think it's not, but the more I listen to it, the more I understand > it. Some people may never get it, but I truly believe that this music will > eventually be played on the radio in 10 to 20 years from now. At least > something close to it and we will all be listening to something even more > fucked up than this. LOL.

I absolutely love this kind of music with the bizarre sounds, but my only beef with lentic was, again, not the sounds, but the lack of evolution in the sounds. As for people listening to this on the radio in twenty years, dream on. The average human doesn't find listening to an album 10 times before they appreciate it rewarding, and for that, Ae will never become a pop legacy. Don't keep your hopes up. -mark

quoted 1 line

>

Peter Schrock wrote: <<ON LENTIC CATACHRESIS>>

quoted 9 lines See, that is where you are missing it. Listen to it again. I was really

> See, that is where you are missing it. Listen to it again. I was really > challenged yesterday when I read you post and had to listen to it again. I > actually found there to be progression. The thing with it is that it is at > such high BPM that it is virtually undetectable to notice changes happening. > The rhythm is so upbeat and the changes are so minimal that it is extremely > difficult to notice any changes at all. > I know what you mean thougha about it sounding repetitious. About the > point of the song where the beats fall apart and then pick up into the that > upbeat mode, that is usually where I will end the CD anyway.

Yes it is very subtle, but at that level, I doubt the progression of the song was intended by human hands (as in it was programming or accidental programming), leaving it sounding a bit stale. I went back a and forth and listened through it the whole a couple times, and it just isn't satisfying for me to attempt to analyze that small amount of textural change over a period of two popsonglengths (six minutes). <<ON UVIOL>>

quoted 4 lines Yeah, I understand this, but it is no different than the progression at the

> Yeah, I understand this, but it is no different than the progression at the > end of Lentic. Although, the changes are more apperent, they are just as > repetitious as Lentic. >

I disagree here, still. Going back and listening to Uviol, the structure is indeed minimal, (whereas lentic actually is quite drastic in it's transition about 3 minutes in), but overall has things constantly changing, moving in and out, and has a solid morphing near syncopated melody playing all the way through that changes keys constantly, keeping you on your toes. I find this to be drastically more full bodied and non-repetitious when compared to Lentic, where that there's basically 2 different chords switching back and forth, and pounding beats that don't change. The things that do change, the squelchy glitch tones in between the beats, are barely audible enough for analysis, let alone enjoyment. <<ON IDM RADIO>>

quoted 18 lines I didn't say AE would be played on the radio, I said this music. This is

> I didn't say AE would be played on the radio, I said this music. This is > what I said. > >> but I truly believe that this music will >> eventually be played on the radio in 10 to 20 years from now. At least >> something close to it > > Notice that I said "something close to it". I was listening to music ten > times better and more aggressive in high school and post high school than > Korn, Slipknot, and all these crap bands that we hear about in the > "mainstream" (whatever that is suppose to mean). Never did I think this > kind of music (as some may call hardcore) would ever hit the airwaves, but > it did. And that only took five years. > The radio will always play a dilutted versions of what is really good. > Rarely does anyone really good get airplay. And on that note, I can agree > that AE will most likely never get any radio play, unless it's on a college > radio station or something. >

first off, what was some of the stuff more aggressive than the aforementioned bands you were listening to that made it to radio? Just curious where you're coming from (I haven't listened to radio in a bout 4 years... so...I'm fully ignorant here) second, "this music" has kind of already had it's day on the radio with Orbital, Crystal Method, and the Chembros hitting radio in 1996/1997. Orbital would be considered the Brittney Spears of IDM I would think, and that's probably as close as we'll get to melodic experimental, non house/trance electronic music getting onto national airwaves. I don't see Plaid/Arovane/Bola/Boards like bands making it, despite their melodic and earfriendliness. -mark