IDM Mailing Archive

http://www.rollingstone.com/recordings/review.asp?aid=2043238 Aphex twin, also known as England's Richard James, was once a pioneer of techno and ambient electronic music, and he made records, particularly 1993's gorgeous Selected Ambient Works 85-92, that changed the course of electronic music. But since then, he has bravely charted a course toward tech-noise and slowly veered into unlistenability. With Drukqs, James delivers his most irrelevant album to date: a double CD, thirty-track compendium of indecipherable song titles, gratuitously weird sounds and occasional wisps of ersatz classical piano that are aimlessly pretty. The moody "Kladfvgbung Micshk" sounds like incidental music for a haunted-house movie by Damien Hirst, but tracks like this inevitably lead to tracks like "Cock/Ver 10," a hyperactive splutter of drum-machine beats and deflating video-game drones. The confused and self-indulgent "Gwarek 2" is a seven-minute soundscape that resembles something that Trent Reznor might have recorded after listening to the Beatles' "Revolution 9," then erased the next day. Among fans of IDM, or Intelligent Dance Music, as this sort of stuff is unfortunately labeled, rumor has it that James merely loaded this record with outtakes that have been eating up space on his hard drive for years, then released the album as a deal-breaker with his label, Warp. Or perhaps the explanation for the incoherence of the album lies in its punny, unfunny title. Either way, he should have never done Drukqs, because his new noise mostly just sounds fukqed up. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

bwa hahaha. who hired that village idiot to write that review? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Stein" <Michael.Stein@allscripts.com> To: <idm@hyperreal.org> Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 1:44 PM Subject: [idm] Rolling Stone on Drukqs

quoted 11 lines > http://www.rollingstone.com/recordings/review.asp?aid=2043238 > > Aphex twin, also known as England's Richard James, was once a pioneer of > techno > and ambient electronic music, and he made records, particularly 1993's > gorgeous > Selected Ambient Works 85-92, that changed the course of electronic music. > But > since then, he has bravely charted a course toward tech-noise and slowly > veered > into unlistenability. With Drukqs, James delivers his most irrelevant

album

quoted 7 lines to date:

> to date: > a double CD, thirty-track compendium of indecipherable song titles, > gratuitously > weird sounds and occasional wisps of ersatz classical piano that are > aimlessly > pretty. The moody "Kladfvgbung Micshk" sounds like incidental music for a > haunted-house movie by Damien Hirst, but tracks like this inevitably lead

to

quoted 14 lines tracks

> tracks > like "Cock/Ver 10," a hyperactive splutter of drum-machine beats and > deflating > video-game drones. The confused and self-indulgent "Gwarek 2" is a > seven-minute > soundscape that resembles something that Trent Reznor might have recorded > after > listening to the Beatles' "Revolution 9," then erased the next day. Among > fans of > IDM, or Intelligent Dance Music, as this sort of stuff is unfortunately > labeled, rumor > has it that James merely loaded this record with outtakes that have been > eating up > space on his hard drive for years, then released the album as a

deal-breaker

quoted 2 lines with

> with > his label, Warp. Or perhaps the explanation for the incoherence of the

album

quoted 9 lines lies

> lies > in its punny, unfunny title. Either way, he should have never done Drukqs, > because > his new noise mostly just sounds fukqed up. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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

I can see how one could have such an opinion though. I must admit, and I would bet my left foot that there are at least a few that would agree....there have been quite a few Aphex Twin songs that when I think "if this was not Aphex, but just some unsigned artist how would I feel about it? interesting? yes, though provoking? most of the time.....but sometimes I would not be afraid to say that in my humble opinion its just a bunch of "fuckery" that almost anyone with enough gadgets and a computer could pull off..... I wouldn't say Apex Twin is not a great musician and a wonderful artist.....I think he's great....but sometimes its just too much of nothing, and I think a lot of whats on Drukqs, when compared to where it seemed he was headed.....is just lazy, random, and certainly nothing close to what he is really capable of. --- Lucas Caldwell <luke82@charter.net> wrote:

quoted 11 lines bwa hahaha. who hired that village idiot to write

> bwa hahaha. who hired that village idiot to write > that review? > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Michael Stein" <Michael.Stein@allscripts.com> > To: <idm@hyperreal.org> > Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 1:44 PM > Subject: [idm] Rolling Stone on Drukqs > > > > >

http://www.rollingstone.com/recordings/review.asp?aid=2043238

quoted 62 lines Aphex twin, also known as England's Richard James,

> > > > Aphex twin, also known as England's Richard James, > was once a pioneer of > > techno > > and ambient electronic music, and he made records, > particularly 1993's > > gorgeous > > Selected Ambient Works 85-92, that changed the > course of electronic music. > > But > > since then, he has bravely charted a course toward > tech-noise and slowly > > veered > > into unlistenability. With Drukqs, James delivers > his most irrelevant > album > > to date: > > a double CD, thirty-track compendium of > indecipherable song titles, > > gratuitously > > weird sounds and occasional wisps of ersatz > classical piano that are > > aimlessly > > pretty. The moody "Kladfvgbung Micshk" sounds like > incidental music for a > > haunted-house movie by Damien Hirst, but tracks > like this inevitably lead > to > > tracks > > like "Cock/Ver 10," a hyperactive splutter of > drum-machine beats and > > deflating > > video-game drones. The confused and self-indulgent > "Gwarek 2" is a > > seven-minute > > soundscape that resembles something that Trent > Reznor might have recorded > > after > > listening to the Beatles' "Revolution 9," then > erased the next day. Among > > fans of > > IDM, or Intelligent Dance Music, as this sort of > stuff is unfortunately > > labeled, rumor > > has it that James merely loaded this record with > outtakes that have been > > eating up > > space on his hard drive for years, then released > the album as a > deal-breaker > > with > > his label, Warp. Or perhaps the explanation for > the incoherence of the > album > > lies > > in its punny, unfunny title. Either way, he should > have never done Drukqs, > > because > > his new noise mostly just sounds fukqed up. > > > > >

---------------------------------------------------------------------

quoted 8 lines To unsubscribe, e-mail:

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

---------------------------------------------------------------------

quoted 5 lines To unsubscribe, e-mail:

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

__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals. http://personals.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

quoted 3 lines that in my humble opinion its just a bunch of

> that in my humble opinion its just a bunch of > "fuckery" that almost anyone with enough gadgets and > a computer could pull off.....

I'm not trying argue with you here, just offering a different opinion: I think that people who do spend long evenings in front a computer and surrounded by various articles of gadgetry might get more enjoyment out of drukqs because alot of it seems to extend beyond the realm of simple, mindless fuckery. There's quite a few moments on the album which left me thinking "What the fuck? How'd he do that?"... something I've come to expect (and thouroughly enjoy) from each Aphex release. Of course, this game isn't for everyone, so your point is equally valid. _______________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.ca address at http://mail.yahoo.ca --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

Almost sounds like the Rolling Stone guy read my review from All Music Guide: Despite threatening retirement several times, in 2001 Richard D. James finally released another Aphex Twin record. But for all this record tells us, he may still be in retirement. Spreading 30 tracks (most with unpronounceable titles) across two discs, Drukqs sounds less like a major new statement from electronica's best producer than the results of a Sunday afternoon's trawl through his hard drive for files he hasn't released before. Many songs here evoke the feel of recordings long since past, from the quiet ambient-techno of his breakthrough Selected Ambient Works 85-92 to the demonically extroverted programming of Richard D. James Album and the Come to Daddy EP. Stylistically, the record leans toward the later recordings, with many tracks here reprising the off-key melodies and overloaded drum programming of "Come to Daddy" or "Windowlicker." There's also little rhyme or reason to the program; James veers directly from a drill'n'bass firestorm ("Cock/Ver 10") to a delicate piano piece a la Erik Satie ("Avril 14th") to an acid-techno burner ("Mt. Saint Michel Mix") with barely a glance backward for transition. Of course, aside from all the criticism, the previously unreleased musings of Aphex Twin are still far more intriguing and solid than most producers' best releases. The opener "Jynweythek Ylow" and "Ruglen Holon" are brilliant, inscrutable pieces reminiscent of a rusty, bygone music box or the gamelan music of Indonesia. And a few of the second-disc highlights, "Meltphace 6" and "Taking Control," chart a middle-ground between the emotional ambience of early Aphex Twin and the wracked hysteria of his later work. Drukqs is a sprawling album that defies listeners to understand or enjoy it as a whole - it would've made a much better fan-only release than the long-awaited return of the techno vanguard's favorite producer. - John Bush http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=Auz59kebtsq7n --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

Im trying to argue either but....I spend about 6-14 hours a day in my studio which is filled with all kinds of "gadgetry"....which is how in my opinion its more messy and lazy than it is complex.....yes it does have its beautiful and complex moments....but most of the time it just seems a cop-out....in my opinion. As a recording artist/musician it is interesting to listen to how he does his processing....but, in my opinion, anyone with enough experience and know-how could easily see how this could be done very easily and in very little time...all you need to do for most of it is assign your effects to be controlled by any number of midi controllers....then all you have to do is record the parameter changes....once you have layered all these effects...I wont get all into technical aspects unless someone wants to go private about it....but for example.... you could assign the delay depth and modulation rate to an X-Y controller and get a very Aphex sound while passing a drum loop through it and randomly sliding your finger up/down, left/right on the X-Y ribbon or pad.....you could also assign a set of knobs to control various effects and do a little extra engineering work and it would sound much more complex....I would not mind at all explaining how to achieve a very Aphex sound if people want to hear it.....in my opinion its just too easy for what I think Richard is capable of. xh --- Doug <umstechi@yahoo.ca> wrote:

quoted 24 lines that in my humble opinion its just a bunch of

> > that in my humble opinion its just a bunch of > > "fuckery" that almost anyone with enough gadgets > and > > a computer could pull off..... > > I'm not trying argue with you here, just offering a > different opinion: I think that people who do spend > long evenings in front a computer and surrounded by > various articles of gadgetry might get more > enjoyment > out of drukqs because alot of it seems to extend > beyond the realm of simple, mindless fuckery. > There's > quite a few moments on the album which left me > thinking "What the fuck? How'd he do that?"... > something I've come to expect (and thouroughly > enjoy) > from each Aphex release. Of course, this game isn't > for everyone, so your point is equally valid. > > > > >

_______________________________________________________

quoted 2 lines Do You Yahoo!?

> Do You Yahoo!? > Get your free @yahoo.ca address at

http://mail.yahoo.ca ===== Kounterakt in constant evolution.http://www.kounterakt.cjb.net ("Industrial",Rock, Experimental, I.D.M.)Circle Of Anxietyhttp://www.cofanx.cjb.net (should appeal to fans of all sorts of I.D.M.) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals. http://personals.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

"Among fans of IDM, or Intelligent Dance Music, as this sort of stuff is unfortunately labeled" What the hell is he talking about? Then he goes on to say that HE thinks Richard just threw together the crap lying on his computers to make the album? Christ man, the album's not THAT bad. 1/5 score? Pheww.. I would give Drukqs 3.5/5 for a rating if I had to. I think most people would agree. - Dan J. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lucas Caldwell" <luke82@charter.net> To: <idm@hyperreal.org> Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 10:21 PM Subject: Re: [idm] Rolling Stone on Drukqs

quoted 15 lines bwa hahaha. who hired that village idiot to write that review?

> bwa hahaha. who hired that village idiot to write that review? > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Michael Stein" <Michael.Stein@allscripts.com> > To: <idm@hyperreal.org> > Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 1:44 PM > Subject: [idm] Rolling Stone on Drukqs > > > > http://www.rollingstone.com/recordings/review.asp?aid=2043238 > > > > Aphex twin, also known as England's Richard James, was once a pioneer of > > techno > > and ambient electronic music, and he made records, particularly 1993's > > gorgeous > > Selected Ambient Works 85-92, that changed the course of electronic

music.

quoted 11 lines But

> > But > > since then, he has bravely charted a course toward tech-noise and slowly > > veered > > into unlistenability. With Drukqs, James delivers his most irrelevant > album > > to date: > > a double CD, thirty-track compendium of indecipherable song titles, > > gratuitously > > weird sounds and occasional wisps of ersatz classical piano that are > > aimlessly > > pretty. The moody "Kladfvgbung Micshk" sounds like incidental music for

a

quoted 1 line haunted-house movie by Damien Hirst, but tracks like this inevitably

> > haunted-house movie by Damien Hirst, but tracks like this inevitably

lead

quoted 7 lines to

> to > > tracks > > like "Cock/Ver 10," a hyperactive splutter of drum-machine beats and > > deflating > > video-game drones. The confused and self-indulgent "Gwarek 2" is a > > seven-minute > > soundscape that resembles something that Trent Reznor might have

recorded

quoted 2 lines after

> > after > > listening to the Beatles' "Revolution 9," then erased the next day.

Among

quoted 12 lines fans of

> > fans of > > IDM, or Intelligent Dance Music, as this sort of stuff is unfortunately > > labeled, rumor > > has it that James merely loaded this record with outtakes that have been > > eating up > > space on his hard drive for years, then released the album as a > deal-breaker > > with > > his label, Warp. Or perhaps the explanation for the incoherence of the > album > > lies > > in its punny, unfunny title. Either way, he should have never done

Drukqs,

quoted 13 lines because

> > because > > his new noise mostly just sounds fukqed up. > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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 >

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

Well actually, not that I've read the article or agree but to add some perspective I will reply. The paragraph you posted below (the only part of the article I have read) is so very much like something you would hear on this very list. At least once a year we have to have the "how unfortunate this genre is called IDM, whose fault is it, why don't we name it something different and what does everyone call it when they try to describe it to someone else?" argument. In addition there are plenty of people on the list who've said the album sucks and would probably give it a 1/5 score. So your question of "What the hell is he talking about?" is exactly what people on this very list are talking about. But maybe the same can be said for them. I suppose you could just use [insert big-name IDM artist here] as an example because before every new album there are people who say it's the worst crap ever and most definitely not as brilliant as their older and much better stuff. Personally I think the new Aphex album is fucking great. I absolutely love it. I already have the promo/bootleg/mp3's and my copy from Warp is in the mail and on it's way. So there ya go.... My two Cents. Shimone/Justes http://www.staticbeats.com | Electronic Music For The Mind http://www.shimone.org | Pictures From The Soul ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan John" <djohn1@home.com> To: "Lucas Caldwell" <luke82@charter.net>; <idm@hyperreal.org> Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 7:40 AM Subject: Re: [idm] Rolling Stone on Drukqs

quoted 11 lines "Among fans of IDM, or Intelligent Dance Music, as this sort of stuff is

> "Among fans of IDM, or Intelligent Dance Music, as this sort of stuff is > unfortunately labeled" > > What the hell is he talking about? Then he goes on to say that HE thinks > Richard just threw together the crap lying on his computers to make the > album? Christ man, the album's not THAT bad. 1/5 score? Pheww.. I would > give Drukqs 3.5/5 for a rating if I had to. I think most people would > agree. > > - Dan J. >

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

Ok... first, I like Drukqs. No, its not going to change the world or the IDM scene. However, I really just generally dig the whole thing. Another thing is that the tracks instantly register with me as being Aphex Twin. They bare his something distinctive that automatically tells me its RDJ. Mind you, this doesn't really hold for the piano tracks mainly because its not a sound I ever really associated with Aphex Twin. So now, you are saying with very little effort, you could create a track with the signature Aphex sound? I implore you, next 6-14 hour session with your gadgetry, spend a little piece of time making a track that would instantly make me think "Aphex" and that would fit nicely with the "lazy" collection known as Drukqs. I'd really like to hear it. Regardless, whether or not he spent little time making these tracks either in the past year or 7 years ago, I still like it. Maybe its because I don't make IDM and am not disecting how he did this in VST/MAX/MSP/whatever. Ignorance is bliss I suppose. -Aaron by the way... I picked up the FSOL "My Kingdom" EP today. I didn't know this existed! Its like a half hour 5 part suite version of one of my favorite FSOL songs! Its awesome!

quoted 27 lines As a recording artist/musician it is interesting to

> > As a recording artist/musician it is interesting to > listen to how he does his processing....but, in my > opinion, anyone with enough experience and know-how > could easily see how this could be done very easily > and in very little time...all you need to do for most > of it is assign your effects to be controlled by any > number of midi controllers....then all you have to do > is record the parameter changes....once you have > layered all these effects...I wont get all into > technical aspects unless someone wants to go private > about it....but for example.... > you could assign the delay depth and modulation rate > to an X-Y controller and get a very Aphex sound while > passing a drum loop through it and randomly sliding > your finger up/down, left/right on the X-Y ribbon or > pad.....you could also assign a set of knobs to > control various effects and do a little extra > engineering work and it would sound much more > complex....I would not mind at all explaining how to > achieve a very Aphex sound if people want to hear > it.....in my opinion its just too easy for what I > think Richard is capable of. > > xh > >

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

Aaron D Meyers wrote:

quoted 3 lines Maybe

> Maybe > its because I don't make IDM and am not disecting how he did this in > VST/MAX/MSP/whatever. Ignorance is bliss I suppose.

No, I think it's just there are a bunch of elitist wankers that masturbate to their own tunes and have some delusional complex that makes them think they can do anything "just like Aphex/autechre". They don't feel the music, they have no soul- they can only technically analyse how it was made and try and one-up each others geek superiority with bits of pseudo-musical theory and random guesses of what the aforementioned artists made their music with. And then they declare they could do better with the same equipment. Because all they are is human midi sequencers and references on musical theory. Not artists with soul. If you really could do all you claim, why aren't you fuckers famous? It would be easier for you to hear and appreciate the music if you didn't talk about yourselves so fucking much. -- forel elitist fuck --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

I think that the idea that the quality of an action (music making, acting, writing, etc.) is what makes people famous is a little naive. In fact, I'd tend to think that what makes most people famous is a combination of luck, and being in the right place in the right time (which really just boils down to luck). That's not to say that there's no overlap between the famous and the good (at whatever they do), or between the unfamous and the bad. Of course, I have never done anything that could conceivably make me famous and never tried to publish or distribute any music. I haven't really been following the argument that this statement came out of, so maybe I am missing some context, too. -Kyle R On Thu, Oct 25, 2001 at 11:50:40PM -0400, forel wrote:

quoted 3 lines If you really could do all you claim, why aren't you fuckers famous? It

> If you really could do all you claim, why aren't you fuckers famous? It > would be easier for you to hear and appreciate the music if you didn't talk > about yourselves so fucking much.

-- http://mas.cs.umass.edu/~rawlins -- God is god. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

Kyle Rawlins <rawlins@cs.umass.edu> wrote: : I think that the idea that the quality of an action (music making, acting, : writing, etc.) is what makes people famous is a little naive. In fact, I'd : tend to think that what makes most people famous is a combination of luck, and : being in the right place in the right time (which really just boils down to : luck). That's not to say that there's no overlap between the famous and the : good (at whatever they do), or between the unfamous and the bad. There is some truth, here, but I think that the main quality which makes people famous is the ability to form (and perhaps to exploit) the right relationships. That's pretty much it. Talent (at least enough to sustain celebrity) is abundant. The folks who "make it" are the ones who sell themselves the best, acquire the support of others who help sell them further, and so on. The ultimate "sale" is then made to the public... This is why there isn't a one-to-one relationship between "quality of an action" and fame. And it's why fame doesn't have much bearing on this discussion, and the challenge "If you really could do all you claim, why aren't you fuckers famous?" is irrelevent, at best (which I think was your point). -Ed --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

I agree with you and think I definitely missed that one (the importance of networking). I suspect that part of forming the right relationships involves being in the right place at the right time (and luck) - but there is more to it than that. All of the people I've seen who are succesful academics, and perhaps well known or famous inside their small community, are tremendously good at networking, making contacts, etc. Also it occurs to me that from some perspectives higher 'quality of an action' is almost antithetical to fame. This is a fairly vague statement, but reading, say, 'zen and the art of archery' (which I did last week), particularly some of the initial comments about why the author wrote the book, might help explain what I am getting at. Quality is a very internal thing from that perspective. But probably thousands of works have been written on 'quality', so enough rambling from someone who knows very little about the concept. I shall continue to think about it, though. -Kyle R On Fri, Oct 26, 2001 at 02:05:16PM -0700, Ed Hall wrote:

quoted 16 lines Kyle Rawlins <rawlins@cs.umass.edu> wrote:

> Kyle Rawlins <rawlins@cs.umass.edu> wrote: > > There is some truth, here, but I think that the main quality which makes > people famous is the ability to form (and perhaps to exploit) the right > relationships. That's pretty much it. Talent (at least enough to sustain > celebrity) is abundant. The folks who "make it" are the ones who sell > themselves the best, acquire the support of others who help sell them > further, and so on. The ultimate "sale" is then made to the public... > > This is why there isn't a one-to-one relationship between "quality of an > action" and fame. And it's why fame doesn't have much bearing on this > discussion, and the challenge "If you really could do all you claim, why > aren't you fuckers famous?" is irrelevent, at best (which I think was > your point). > > -Ed

-- http://mas.cs.umass.edu/~rawlins -- What a world of solemn thought their monody compels! --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

On Fri, 26 Oct 2001, Kyle Rawlins wrote:

quoted 4 lines I agree with you and think I definitely missed that one (the importance of

> I agree with you and think I definitely missed that one (the importance of > networking). I suspect that part of forming the right relationships involves > being in the right place at the right time (and luck) - but there is more to > it than that.

One word: Publicists Lots of people do really good work in semi-obscurity. To do better than that you must do some really careerist things, like hiring a publicist. It also helps if you learn not to badmouth people who stand to help you. You'd be surprised how many 'wannabes' spend a lot of time dissing established artists. It is possible to burn bridges. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

Gee, forel - thanks so much for speaking on behalf of all of the list members who aren't "elitist wankers". Has it ever occured to you that some members of this list might actually make music simply for the love of doing so, and not to "be famous"? Who's talking like an elitist now? Somebody must have pissed in your cereal bowl this morning... What professional releases do YOU have out there, forel? -somrux. ----- Original Message ----- From: "forel" <forel@mac.com> To: <idm@hyperreal.org> Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 10:50 PM Subject: Re: [idm] Rolling Stone on Drukqs

quoted 9 lines Aaron D Meyers wrote:

> Aaron D Meyers wrote: > > > Maybe > > its because I don't make IDM and am not disecting how he did this in > > VST/MAX/MSP/whatever. Ignorance is bliss I suppose. > > No, I think it's just there are a bunch of elitist wankers that masturbate > to their own tunes and have some delusional complex that makes them think > they can do anything "just like Aphex/autechre". They don't feel the

music,

quoted 1 line they have no soul- they can only technically analyse how it was made and

> they have no soul- they can only technically analyse how it was made and

try

quoted 2 lines and one-up each others geek superiority with bits of pseudo-musical theory

> and one-up each others geek superiority with bits of pseudo-musical theory > and random guesses of what the aforementioned artists made their music

with.

quoted 1 line And then they declare they could do better with the same equipment.

> And then they declare they could do better with the same equipment.

Because

quoted 1 line all they are is human midi sequencers and references on musical theory.

> all they are is human midi sequencers and references on musical theory.

Not

quoted 4 lines artists with soul.

> artists with soul. > > If you really could do all you claim, why aren't you fuckers famous? It > would be easier for you to hear and appreciate the music if you didn't

talk

quoted 11 lines about yourselves so fucking much.

> about yourselves so fucking much. > > -- forel > elitist fuck > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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

Its too bad disussions all to often have to turn into arguments. This thread started out just fine....if you dont like what you read, dont reply, at least not if its only to attack the other list members...there is nothing wrong with a little heated debate or discussion as long as were not attacking eachother. Go back and read how the thread started and I think youll see I didnt just come out of knowhere talking tech. about Aphex Twin....and for your information I do know how to enjoy music....at least I think I do, maybe you have some special tactics I dont. Either way, were disscussing "idm" here, who cares how you listen to it. --- somrux <bishop@somrux.com> wrote:

quoted 67 lines Gee, forel - thanks so much for speaking on behalf

> Gee, forel - thanks so much for speaking on behalf > of all of the list > members who aren't "elitist wankers". Has it ever > occured to you that some > members of this list might actually make music > simply for the love of doing > so, and not to "be famous"? Who's talking like an > elitist now? Somebody > must have pissed in your cereal bowl this morning... > > What professional releases do YOU have out there, > forel? > > -somrux. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "forel" <forel@mac.com> > To: <idm@hyperreal.org> > Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 10:50 PM > Subject: Re: [idm] Rolling Stone on Drukqs > > > > Aaron D Meyers wrote: > > > > > Maybe > > > its because I don't make IDM and am not > disecting how he did this in > > > VST/MAX/MSP/whatever. Ignorance is bliss I > suppose. > > > > No, I think it's just there are a bunch of elitist > wankers that masturbate > > to their own tunes and have some delusional > complex that makes them think > > they can do anything "just like Aphex/autechre". > They don't feel the > music, > > they have no soul- they can only technically > analyse how it was made and > try > > and one-up each others geek superiority with bits > of pseudo-musical theory > > and random guesses of what the aforementioned > artists made their music > with. > > And then they declare they could do better with > the same equipment. > Because > > all they are is human midi sequencers and > references on musical theory. > Not > > artists with soul. > > > > If you really could do all you claim, why aren't > you fuckers famous? It > > would be easier for you to hear and appreciate the > music if you didn't > talk > > about yourselves so fucking much. > > > > -- forel > > elitist fuck > > > > > > >

---------------------------------------------------------------------

quoted 9 lines To unsubscribe, e-mail:

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

---------------------------------------------------------------------

quoted 5 lines To unsubscribe, e-mail:

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

__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals. http://personals.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

Its too bad disussions all to often have to turn into arguments. This thread started out just fine....if you dont like what you read, dont reply, at least not if its only to attack the other list members...there is nothing wrong with a little heated debate or discussion as long as were not attacking eachother. Go back and read how the thread started and I think youll see I didnt just come out of knowhere talking tech. about Aphex Twin....and for your information I do know how to enjoy music....at least I think I do, maybe you have some special tactics I dont. Either way, were disscussing "idm" here, who cares how you listen to it... like one member said "ignorance is bliss", if you like to listen blind thats fine, and maybe you dont have a choice...but when you know how things are done you really cant help but listen a little deeper. (I couldnt put that last part in any other way, so take it lightly...that was NOT in any way to say that people who dont have technical knowledge about music cannot enjoy or understand music on the same level as people who do, or to say that you would be on some sub-level....we all appreciate and get into things for our own reasons, and it just so happens that some have in common with others those same reasons....so forgive us if we feel like talking about it.) --- somrux <bishop@somrux.com> wrote:

quoted 67 lines Gee, forel - thanks so much for speaking on behalf

> Gee, forel - thanks so much for speaking on behalf > of all of the list > members who aren't "elitist wankers". Has it ever > occured to you that some > members of this list might actually make music > simply for the love of doing > so, and not to "be famous"? Who's talking like an > elitist now? Somebody > must have pissed in your cereal bowl this morning... > > What professional releases do YOU have out there, > forel? > > -somrux. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "forel" <forel@mac.com> > To: <idm@hyperreal.org> > Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 10:50 PM > Subject: Re: [idm] Rolling Stone on Drukqs > > > > Aaron D Meyers wrote: > > > > > Maybe > > > its because I don't make IDM and am not > disecting how he did this in > > > VST/MAX/MSP/whatever. Ignorance is bliss I > suppose. > > > > No, I think it's just there are a bunch of elitist > wankers that masturbate > > to their own tunes and have some delusional > complex that makes them think > > they can do anything "just like Aphex/autechre". > They don't feel the > music, > > they have no soul- they can only technically > analyse how it was made and > try > > and one-up each others geek superiority with bits > of pseudo-musical theory > > and random guesses of what the aforementioned > artists made their music > with. > > And then they declare they could do better with > the same equipment. > Because > > all they are is human midi sequencers and > references on musical theory. > Not > > artists with soul. > > > > If you really could do all you claim, why aren't > you fuckers famous? It > > would be easier for you to hear and appreciate the > music if you didn't > talk > > about yourselves so fucking much. > > > > -- forel > > elitist fuck > > > > > > >

---------------------------------------------------------------------

quoted 9 lines To unsubscribe, e-mail:

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

---------------------------------------------------------------------

quoted 5 lines To unsubscribe, e-mail:

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

__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals. http://personals.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

quoted 7 lines Gee, forel - thanks so much for speaking on behalf of all of the list

>Gee, forel - thanks so much for speaking on behalf of all of the list >members who aren't "elitist wankers". Has it ever occured to you that some >members of this list might actually make music simply for the love of doing >so, and not to "be famous"? Who's talking like an elitist now? Somebody >must have pissed in your cereal bowl this morning... > >What professional releases do YOU have out there, forel?

What does that have to do with anything? forel doesn't claim to be an artist at all in his post. If somebody pissed in forel's cereal bowl this morning, someone else did the green apple two-step in yours... and "professional" release reeks of elitism, too. what exactly constitutes a "professional" release? anyway, i happen to agree with mr meyers and this forel guy... its easy to listen to aphex (or autechre or whoever) say "oh that's just some [blah blah tech talk]", its another thing to do it. similar to, "oh, classical music? that shit's just pianos and crap..." -- - Jeremy Axon Patria o muerte! --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

quoted 5 lines What does that have to do with anything? forel doesn't claim to be an

> What does that have to do with anything? forel doesn't claim to be an > artist at all in his post. If somebody pissed in forel's cereal bowl > this morning, someone else did the green apple two-step in yours... > and "professional" release reeks of elitism, too. what exactly > constitutes a "professional" release?

Well, he must be a pretty good artist to openly bash all of us elitist wankers for offering our "artistic opinions". Unprovoked, I might add. It's pretty easy to stand on the side of the road and throw rocks at passing cars, don't you think? Professional release? How about one that isn't burned on CDR and features a xerox'ed label? I guess that's what I see as a professional release. But that's my opinion...

quoted 4 lines anyway, i happen to agree with mr meyers and this forel guy... its

> anyway, i happen to agree with mr meyers and this forel guy... its > easy to listen to aphex (or autechre or whoever) say "oh that's just > some [blah blah tech talk]", its another thing to do it. similar to, > "oh, classical music? that shit's just pianos and crap..."

That's cool - your opinions are valid here, and there is a difference between your post and forel's. Sharing an opinion or advice or knowledge is cool as can be, but flaming the hell outta some people on the list *unprovoked* for simply having their own opinion is quite another. Disagreeing is fine, but when someone just flames and entire group of people who have been writing to a thread, well that's not very cool now, is it? --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

somrux wrote:

quoted 2 lines Well, he must be a pretty good artist to openly bash all of us elitist

> Well, he must be a pretty good artist to openly bash all of us elitist > wankers for offering our "artistic opinions".

I bashed no one for "artistic opinions," I bashed for cold emotionless technical analysis of music and self-inflated claims that they could do the same or better.

quoted 6 lines That's cool - your opinions are valid here, and there is a difference

> That's cool - your opinions are valid here, and there is a difference > between your post and forel's. Sharing an opinion or advice or knowledge is > cool as can be, but flaming the hell outta some people on the list > *unprovoked* for simply having their own opinion is quite another. > Disagreeing is fine, but when someone just flames and entire group of people > who have been writing to a thread, well that's not very cool now, is it?

I disagree with the fact that I flamed "an entire group of people." It was merely the same few that had the same claims during the long and boring Confield thread, that they could do the same or better with the same equipment. I did not, however, say that no one on this list who is an artist couldn't make some talented music, or that anyone who says their music is good is lying- but to say that you can do THE EXACT SAME THING as RDJ is self-inflated self-centered masturbation. I must apologise if you took it as though I was bashing your personal talent or skills as an artist, somrux. It was not my intention. On the contrary, I just downloaded the track you posted to the IDM-Making list, and I liked it quite a lot. -- forel elitist fuck --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

I like Boards of Canada :) - Dan J. ----- Original Message ----- From: "somrux" <bishop@somrux.com> To: <idm@hyperreal.org> Cc: "jeremy axon" <jeremy@eyedmedia.com> Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 12:08 PM Subject: Re: [idm] Rolling Stone on Drukqs

quoted 9 lines What does that have to do with anything? forel doesn't claim to be an

> > What does that have to do with anything? forel doesn't claim to be an > > artist at all in his post. If somebody pissed in forel's cereal bowl > > this morning, someone else did the green apple two-step in yours... > > and "professional" release reeks of elitism, too. what exactly > > constitutes a "professional" release? > > Well, he must be a pretty good artist to openly bash all of us elitist > wankers for offering our "artistic opinions". Unprovoked, I might add. > It's pretty easy to stand on the side of the road and throw rocks at

passing

quoted 3 lines cars, don't you think?

> cars, don't you think? > > Professional release? How about one that isn't burned on CDR and features

a

quoted 10 lines xerox'ed label? I guess that's what I see as a professional release. But

> xerox'ed label? I guess that's what I see as a professional release. But > that's my opinion... > > > anyway, i happen to agree with mr meyers and this forel guy... its > > easy to listen to aphex (or autechre or whoever) say "oh that's just > > some [blah blah tech talk]", its another thing to do it. similar to, > > "oh, classical music? that shit's just pianos and crap..." > > That's cool - your opinions are valid here, and there is a difference > between your post and forel's. Sharing an opinion or advice or knowledge

is

quoted 3 lines cool as can be, but flaming the hell outta some people on the list

> cool as can be, but flaming the hell outta some people on the list > *unprovoked* for simply having their own opinion is quite another. > Disagreeing is fine, but when someone just flames and entire group of

people

quoted 9 lines who have been writing to a thread, well that's not very cool now, is it?

> who have been writing to a thread, well that's not very cool now, is it? > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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

First and foremost, I must apologise for my language in my previous post. It's all too easy sometimes to forget when online that I am responding to a large group of people and not just thinking out loud. somrux wrote:

quoted 4 lines Gee, forel - thanks so much for speaking on behalf of all of the list

> Gee, forel - thanks so much for speaking on behalf of all of the list > members who aren't "elitist wankers". Has it ever occured to you that some > members of this list might actually make music simply for the love of doing > so, and not to "be famous"?

It occurs to me all the time. However, not when it's the people who talk about how they could do the exact same thing as RDJ or Autechre or whomever with the same equipment (see the original post Aaron D. Meyers was replying to)- because they look only at the technical aspect of making music, not the soul, not doing it for the love of making music. As though technical skill is all it takes (which it is not- look at Steve Vai or Joe Satriani. Technically brilliant, musically vapid.)

quoted 1 line What professional releases do YOU have out there, forel?

> What professional releases do YOU have out there, forel?

None, and I don't claim to be able to do anything like the aforementioned artists. I'm an elitist in other ways having nothing to do with making music or the discussions on this list (of course, there are probably now a few list members who would disagree with me after my post). -- forel elitist fuck --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

First I'd like to reply to the part about needing soul to make the music what I personally would call real, and first and foremost, for me makes the music more enjoyable.....it is possible to have a very simple sounding song be quite brilliant....my posts about the technics used by RDJ ON DRUKQS (I wasn't calling him an all around bad artist) was about how I PERSONALLY (and if you go back and look you'll see I really stressed that it was my PERSONAL opinion) could understand the reviewers opinion "because his new noise mostly just sounds fukqed up." Then when I got technical about it all I was trying to say was that I PERSONALLY get next to nothing from it...the album does have its moments and I did say that in my original post, but I PERSONALLY think you'd have to be a drum machine to think that a lot of those songs have any "soul"....I know im not alone on this, a lot of people have spoken there opinions of disappointment of the album, and criticism comes with the territory....its part of being an artist, and it can help you grow as one....and in the post about "burning bridges" I would tell Richard the same thing and Im sure I would either get a "fuck off" or maybe even an open ear because in the world of music SOMETIMES an outside look is warranted and welcome... Im sure when I ship out my release to the good people of this list in NOV. (you're all welcome to a copy) there will be plenty of people who have negative and positive opinions about it...and I will welcome all comments....not all may be taken to heart, but it is part of the ever constant evolution of the musical artist. Lets try not to get so personal next time, the thread started out with a simple debate and welcome comments and opinions and turned into a mild flame war.... xh --- forel <forel@mac.com> wrote:

quoted 48 lines First and foremost, I must apologise for my language

> First and foremost, I must apologise for my language > in my previous post. > It's all too easy sometimes to forget when online > that I am responding to a > large group of people and not just thinking out > loud. > > somrux wrote: > > > Gee, forel - thanks so much for speaking on behalf > of all of the list > > members who aren't "elitist wankers". Has it ever > occured to you that some > > members of this list might actually make music > simply for the love of doing > > so, and not to "be famous"? > > It occurs to me all the time. However, not when it's > the people who talk > about how they could do the exact same thing as RDJ > or Autechre or whomever > with the same equipment (see the original post Aaron > D. Meyers was replying > to)- because they look only at the technical aspect > of making music, not the > soul, not doing it for the love of making music. As > though technical skill > is all it takes (which it is not- look at Steve Vai > or Joe Satriani. > Technically brilliant, musically vapid.) > > > What professional releases do YOU have out there, > forel? > > None, and I don't claim to be able to do anything > like the aforementioned > artists. I'm an elitist in other ways having nothing > to do with making music > or the discussions on this list (of course, there > are probably now a few > list members who would disagree with me after my > post). > > -- forel > elitist fuck > > >

---------------------------------------------------------------------

quoted 5 lines To unsubscribe, e-mail:

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

===== Kounterakt in constant evolution.http://www.kounterakt.cjb.net ("Industrial",Rock, Experimental, I.D.M.)Circle Of Anxietyhttp://www.cofanx.cjb.net (should appeal to fans of all sorts of I.D.M.) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals. http://personals.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

Forel : Sorry for "biting back" at you after your post...I've gotta remember that it's usually a better policy to just move on through the posts if I read something that rubs me the wrong way. I've gotta admit that my response was somewhat spurned on by a string of replies that someone on the list got about a month ago after posting an original track that they were working on... Well, this person actually got some people on the list posting replies that his music sucked, he had no skill, blahblahblah... It just seems that there are some really mean-spirited people floating around out there waiting to respond to some posts (and I'm not implying you). Anyways, I guess I decided subconsciously at that point to be a "fighter for IDM justice", which is just fu**ing ridiculous in itself... I apologize. I think the reason that there really are so many people who are more willing to technically dissect an artist's work (as opposed to listening to what the artist was trying to imply and capture) is that there are quite a few people in this list who make music and who *need* to carefully dissect musical works to learn learn learn... I'll admit to hearing squarepusher's early, early stuff and thinking "what a joke - I could do that easily". And I could have, but now listen to Squarepusher's stuff - I can't touch the guy. He's found his own style and place in the scene and it's really working for him... Anyhoooo, I'm in total agreement with you about the technical skill versus lack of soul and meaning issue - there is a heck of alot of artists who are putting out soul-less music (some 'Mouse on Mars' stuff gives me a soul-less impression - uh-oh, I'd better duck!!). And thanks much for the compliment on the original track... I've gotta figure out what the heck to do with it next..! :) -somrux. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

quoted 1 line I like Boards of Canada :)

>I like Boards of Canada :)

How can you? Aren't they just a bunch of pedophiles? :-) -Mike --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

Well with aphex, there is substance to go along with the hype. He totally knows how to push all the media's buttons.....he's right up there with the KLF when it comes to that. Rob ::::::Component Records::::::: Box 783, Somers, Ct 06071 www.componentrecords.com ----- Original Message ----- From: henrik str.mberg <hs@groove.st> To: <idm@hyperreal.org> Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2001 11:47 AM Subject: Re: [idm] Rolling Stone on Drukqs

quoted 22 lines At 09.15 -0800 01-10-28, roberbil@earthlink.net wrote:

> At 09.15 -0800 01-10-28, roberbil@earthlink.net wrote: > >How did aphex twin > >become famous anyway? > > slow build. > it all started when "digeridoo" was a big hit with both the rave and > the indie crowd - curve always played it before their shows. it's all > just british music press hype: nme, melody maker etc hadn't seen any > techno musician do what he did before and they totally embraced him. > he's totally mediatastic - builds his own synths since age 14, never > sleeps, has tons of unreleased stuff, loads of different aliases, > etc, etc. it's all hype and interesting personality. > > hs > -- > _____________________________ > fossil fuel for fossil people > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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

MAybe I should read a book about the subject instead of asking the list, but since you're talking about it and I"m curious: How did aphex twin become famous anyway? I realize that come to daddy got quite a bit of play here in the states and he's received loads of fame in europe but I have no idea how he got started. Any of you know? _pter ----- Original Message ----- From: Kyle Rawlins To: idm@hyperreal.org Sent: 10/26/01 12:36:36 PM Subject: Re: [idm] Rolling Stone on Drukqs I think that the idea that the quality of an action (music making, acting, writing, etc.) is what makes people famous is a little naive. In fact, I'd tend to think that what makes most people famous is a combination of luck, and being in the right place in the right time (which really just boils down to luck). That's not to say that there's no overlap between the famous and the good (at whatever they do), or between the unfamous and the bad. Of course, I have never done anything that could conceivably make me famous and never tried to publish or distribute any music. I haven't really been following the argument that this statement came out of, so maybe I am missing some context, too. -Kyle R On Thu, Oct 25, 2001 at 11:50:40PM -0400, forel wrote: If you really could do all you claim, why aren't you fuckers famous? It would be easier for you to hear and appreciate the music if you didn't talk about yourselves so fucking much. -- http://mas.cs.umass.edu/~rawlins -- God is god. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

At 09.15 -0800 01-10-28, roberbil@earthlink.net wrote:

quoted 2 lines How did aphex twin

>How did aphex twin >become famous anyway?

slow build. it all started when "digeridoo" was a big hit with both the rave and the indie crowd - curve always played it before their shows. it's all just british music press hype: nme, melody maker etc hadn't seen any techno musician do what he did before and they totally embraced him. he's totally mediatastic - builds his own synths since age 14, never sleeps, has tons of unreleased stuff, loads of different aliases, etc, etc. it's all hype and interesting personality. hs -- _____________________________ fossil fuel for fossil people --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

The K-L-who? ;) -Aaron

quoted 5 lines Well with aphex, there is substance to go along with the hype. He

> Well with aphex, there is substance to go along with the hype. He > totally knows how to push > all the media's buttons.....he's right up there with the KLF when > it comes to that. >

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