IDM Mailing Archive

I think this guff about Mr James "making his own instruments" is a bit of a laff really. There are lots of other capable musicians doing exactly that. On this IDM list, there's Todd Sines, Rob Williams, and muself who do exactly this sort of thing, but we don't brag about it to the Press (unless some journos happen to be reading IDM....damn! :^P ) Cheers, Mark

quoted 5 lines I think this guff about Mr James "making his own instruments" is a bit of

>I think this guff about Mr James "making his own instruments" is a bit of >a laff really. There are lots of other capable musicians doing exactly >that. On this IDM list, there's Todd Sines, Rob Williams, and muself who >do exactly this sort of thing, but we don't brag about it to the Press >(unless some journos happen to be reading IDM....damn! :^P )

i don't make my own instruments because i have barely scratched the surface of some of my equipment. ever try programming a Wavestation? that thing has SO much complexity, i don't even want to begin to talk about it. besides, i still make interesting new sounds with some old gear that is quite limited. and if that gets dull, you can always take your amazing sound that you made on a synth and sample it and use the sampler's guts to twist it. if that's still too boring, there's always Turbosynth - a program for the Mac that can take arbitrary sound files and perform incredibly weird manipulations on them. given that we have so much raw sound material and so many ways to fold spindle and mutilate it, building new boxes seems like a waste of time. /jon

quoted 5 lines given that we have so much raw sound material and so many ways to fold

> >given that we have so much raw sound material and so many ways to fold >spindle and mutilate it, building new boxes seems like a waste of >time. >

ouch. harsh, jon, harsh. I like to make my own and mod my existing equipment, because I KNOW what I want and I KNOW what my setup needs. This is my attraction to modulars, like the beauties Serge are still putting out. You look at you setup, find the holes, and fill them up with specific modules. I agree that a Wavestation (as Jon mentioned before in the above post) is a powerful piece, but some people (such as I) might find it useless in their setup as all the bases it covers, are already covered. There is a point where what the commercial companies make and made just won't do that special something in that special way you want it to. Then, you make\mod something so you DO have a synth that does a PERSONALLY pleasing thing in a way that works well with YOU. Its not just about sounds, its about "ergonomics". ;> Enough gear talk, lets leave that to Analogue Heaven. So, where can I get ahold of the William Orbit mixes of Radioactivity? -- Kennen Sie eine Merle? Kennen Sie eine Merle? Das ist gut...zu gut. Robert Williams</>MANNA-MACHINE<\>fEEd</>Hellsville noise williams@manna-machine.com OR williams@mr.net gerade sie..sie ist mein Opfer. Schad um sie.... sie wird's..ach, nicht lange durchhalten....

quoted 1 line ouch. harsh, jon, harsh.

>ouch. harsh, jon, harsh.

sorry, it's really early for me.

quoted 4 lines I agree that a Wavestation (as Jon mentioned before in the above

>I agree that a Wavestation (as Jon mentioned before in the above >post) is a powerful piece, but some people (such as I) might find it >useless in their setup as all the bases it covers, are already >covered.

i used to think that until i got the Galaxy editor for it...

quoted 2 lines Enough gear talk, lets leave that to Analogue Heaven. So, where can I get

>Enough gear talk, lets leave that to Analogue Heaven. So, where can I get >ahold of the William Orbit mixes of Radioactivity?

the UK 12" has one mix, the US 12" has two. i can't remember if the one from the UK 12" is one of the ones on the US... there might have been a CD single as well, i don't know. /jon

|> |> I think this guff about Mr James "making his own instruments" is a bit of |> a laff really. There are lots of other capable musicians doing exactly |> that. On this IDM list, there's Todd Sines, Rob Williams, and muself who |> do exactly this sort of thing, but we don't brag about it to the Press |> (unless some journos happen to be reading IDM....damn! :^P ) |> |> Cheers, |> |> Mark Seems daft following up your own post, but I should have pointed out that this is NOT an Aphex flame (I've got a few of his discs and they're OK)...don't want to get any hate mail now :^} Cheers, Mark

quoted 5 lines I think this guff about Mr James "making his own instruments" is a bit of

> I think this guff about Mr James "making his own instruments" is a bit of > a laff really. There are lots of other capable musicians doing exactly > that. On this IDM list, there's Todd Sines, Rob Williams, and muself who > do exactly this sort of thing, but we don't brag about it to the Press > (unless some journos happen to be reading IDM....damn! :^P )

Yes, I agree with this. I've been building my own instruments since about 6th grade... it's not that hard to do, kids. He isn't inventing synthesizers or anything. He's experimenting. I do think it's good he's doing that, but he's not god. As long as we're all Aphex-bashing, I'll have to admit I don't think he's a big deal. I have some of his tracks, and I think they're ok. Certain tracks are very good, but I'd say about 80% of his published stuff doesn't impress me. Tom (808-less)

quoted 2 lines Enough gear talk, lets leave that to Analogue Heaven. So, where can I get

> Enough gear talk, lets leave that to Analogue Heaven. So, where can I get > ahold of the William Orbit mixes of Radioactivity?

The shouldn't be that hard to find... the 12" was even a domestic release. The mixes are pretty good in my opinion, but there's always something about William Orbit's production that bugs me. I think it's the way he engineers a track. For example, the Kraftwerk original (well... their remix on The Mix) is a full-sounding, warm mix, but Orbit's lack some of the low-midrange warmth. I've noticed this in a lot of his work... from his first album, Orbit, to a lot of the mixes he's done to SCIII. Perhaps that's his style... Tom

quoted 5 lines As long as we're all Aphex-bashing, I'll have to admit I don't think

> As long as we're all Aphex-bashing, I'll have to admit I don't think > he's a big deal. I have some of his tracks, and I think they're ok. > Certain tracks are very good, but I'd say about 80% of his published > stuff doesn't impress me. >

Well, I'd say about 90% of published techno in general doesn't impress me. It's very easy to say that Aphex is no great artist, and sure there are many tracks of his that I think really bite or "I could have done". (But I didn't, now, did I?) However, his track record holds up. I'll just say that I don't see anyone who is pushing harder on the experimental front, and although I see lots of people saying "He's not that new and exciting" I haven't heard any other suggestions. Who am I missing? I'm not trying to be sarcastic, I'm just being realistic. I like RDJ because his stuff is weird and tweaky and occasionally gorgeous in a genre which has become pretty damn predictable (with the possible other exception of Black Dog Productions). He is very individual and experimental (which by the way is why I find it interesting that "Aphexy" has become an adjective: all experimental music is _not_ Aphexy, and his sound aesthetic is his own just like any other artist's. It's certainly not mine, but I like the fact that he effectively uses sounds that I would never touch). I gave an Aphex mix to a musically critical friend of mine who was listening to Harthouse stuff and thought that was the cutting edge, and I received mail from him saying "This Aphex stuff is _incredible!_." This happens a lot, and I feel very jaded. --Seofon

On Sun, 20 Feb 1994, Jon Drukman wrote:

quoted 11 lines I'll just say that I don't see anyone who is pushing harder on the

> >I'll just say that I don't see anyone who is pushing harder on the > >experimental front, and although I see lots of people saying "He's not > >that new and exciting" I haven't heard any other suggestions. Who am I > >missing? > > Future Sound Of London. > > Jon Drukman jdrukman%dlsun87@oracle.com > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This calls for a very special blend of psychology and extreme violence. >

I agree. "Cascade" is very promising, and if they ever realize their entire project (that they are always talking about in interviews) that would be a real step forward. OK, we got Aphex, Black Dog, and FSoL. And maybe the Orb. Bandulu? I think they all deserve a lot of credit. Interesting that the Orb isn't getting the kind of backlash that Aphex has, even though they're certainly on the same scale. Comparing the two is kind of interesting. Can't think of anything intelligent to say, though... --Seofon

I don't think the orb suffer the same backlash as the aphex twin because the orb haven't released almost any new material in a couple years. i'm sure they'll get their turn on the roasting block when their new album comes out. There are lots of bands that I consider to be innovative, but in some cases i think that's just because they are the only band like that that I have personally heard. They may be just a typical member of a whole genre of music but I think they're 'experimental' because i've never hear anybody else play that kind of music before. Every artist usually playes a wide variety of kinds of music. I don't think there is any artist who seems innovative all the time. I'll put down a few bands that I like and why I think they're innovative. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe this is nothing new, if so tell me, I want to start collecting the other bands they sound like. Also, keep in mind that these artists have produced a lot of music in a lot of styles, I'm just describing why I like them. Standard disclaimers apply. Orbital, they are the most precise musicians i have ever heard, every sound has a specific location in space, and yet they manage to sound very organic, like the way a robot can have very natural motion I suppose. The Orb, very fluid, lots of water and nature sounds. Bits of their songs seem to be telling stories and for me they always recall images of road trips and space travel. The Aphex Twin, loud and abrasive. He creates something that should be obnoxious and then lets you see the beauty in it. Many of the noises are abrasive, but in the context of the song they seem perfectly natural. These are all that I can think of now. When i get back to my room I'll look at the top of a stack of cd's and say, oh, I should have mentioned foo. [fletcher]

Jeffrey Kihn wrote:

quoted 12 lines On Sun, 20 Feb 1994, Jon Drukman wrote:

> > > > On Sun, 20 Feb 1994, Jon Drukman wrote: > > >I'll just say that I don't see anyone who is pushing harder on the > > >experimental front, and although I see lots of people saying "He's not > > >that new and exciting" I haven't heard any other suggestions. Who am I > > >missing? > > > > Future Sound Of London. > > > > Jon Drukman jdrukman%dlsun87@oracle.com

quoted 7 lines I agree. "Cascade" is very promising, and if they ever realize their

> I agree. "Cascade" is very promising, and if they ever realize their > entire project (that they are always talking about in interviews) that > would be a real step forward. > > OK, we got Aphex, Black Dog, and FSoL. And maybe the Orb. Bandulu? > I think they all deserve a lot of credit. >

Not to mention B12 - although some find them "boring" they create as unique a sonic experience as Aphex, and introduce depth in instrumentation _where needed_ for the total mindmelt experience. ------------------------------------------------|------------------------------ "categories strain, crack, and sometimes break | Harvey D. Thornburg step out of the space provided" -NWW | hthornbu@osiris.ac.hmc.edu ------------------------------------------------|----------------------------

Harvey Thornburg writes: [The "experimental front"]

quoted 3 lines Not to mention B12 - although some find them "boring" they create as unique

> Not to mention B12 - although some find them "boring" they create as unique > a sonic experience as Aphex, and introduce depth in instrumentation _where > needed_ for the total mindmelt experience.

What's your definition of unique and experimental then? I enjoy B12's music, but I do so with the awareness that it's little more than an expert pastiche of Detroit techno. C. ObAdditiontoInnovativeList: Sweet Exorcist/Cabaret Voltaire/Sandoz/Richard Kirk. -- (Chris.Hilker) cspot@netcom.com

quoted 10 lines On Sun, 20 Feb 1994, Jon Drukman wrote:

> On Sun, 20 Feb 1994, Jon Drukman wrote: > > >I'll just say that I don't see anyone who is pushing harder on the > >experimental front, and although I see lots of people saying "He's not > >that new and exciting" I haven't heard any other suggestions. Who am I > >missing? > > Future Sound Of London. > > Jon Drukman jdrukman%dlsun87@oracle.com

Or Orbital. I really think that they deserve all the praise they can get. Black Dog comes to mind too. Jesse

And verily Jeffrey Kihn doth spake unto thee:

quoted 3 lines Interesting that the Orb isn't getting the kind of backlash that Aphex

> Interesting that the Orb isn't getting the kind of backlash that Aphex > has, even though they're certainly on the same scale. Comparing the two > is kind of interesting.

Well, the Orb is getting backlash, but mainly in the form of a low-key rumbling because they insist on releasing 10,000 remixes of the same songs (although I'm sure the Mr.Modo problems had something to do with this... so they have an excuse). Besides, they string us along perfectly with promises of new releases... -- M. Skye Poier .... 40% zestier than yesterday Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty f(x) on CJSF 93.9 FM Cable with your host DJ Eli 2-4pm Mondays

On Sun, 20 Feb 1994, Harvey Thornburg wrote:

quoted 2 lines Jeffrey Kihn wrote:

> Jeffrey Kihn wrote: > >

<blah blah blah>

quoted 8 lines OK, we got Aphex, Black Dog, and FSoL. And maybe the Orb. Bandulu?

> > OK, we got Aphex, Black Dog, and FSoL. And maybe the Orb. Bandulu? > > I think they all deserve a lot of credit. > > > > Not to mention B12 - although some find them "boring" they create as unique > a sonic experience as Aphex, and introduce depth in instrumentation _where > needed_ for the total mindmelt experience. >

Funny. I am one of those who found them boring and lackluster, but perhaps they're experimentality is just not the sort that I can recognize. Indeed, I found them quite the antithesis of experimental. Of course, there is something to be said for pure aesthetic.... --Seofon

On Sun, 20 Feb 1994, Jon Drukman wrote:

quoted 7 lines I'll just say that I don't see anyone who is pushing harder on the

> >I'll just say that I don't see anyone who is pushing harder on the > >experimental front, and although I see lots of people saying "He's not > >that new and exciting" I haven't heard any other suggestions. Who am I > >missing? > > Future Sound Of London. >

OK, as long as we're lining all of the sacred cows up against the wall and firing dum-dum bullets into them, I'll have to pipe in with my gripes about FSOL. Until yesterday, I never could quite put my finger on why everyone else seemed to be a lot more impressed with their material than me. In the course of some intensive Sunday afternoon loafing, I put on Amorphous Androgynous' _Tales of Ephidrina_, and _tried_ to listen to it closely. No matter how hard I tried to concentrate on it, I kept being drawn back to the much more interesting issue of _the New Yorker_ sitting on my coffee table. As pretty and impressive as Dougans' and Cockbain's material tends to be, it almost never *engages* me -- I might as well be listening to a 40 minute sample CD. Sure, it sounded nice, but when it ended I had a real hard time remembering what I'd just listened to, so much so that I had to put the Hang-Ups' "Comin' Through" EP on to remind me that is _is_ possible for music to engage the head and heart at the same time (and sometimes the ass too -- props to Vapourspace)... beyond "Papua New Guinea", no FSOL track has ever done that for me (though I will admit to not having heard "Cascade" yet -- the descriptions lead me to believe it's probably more of the same, though.) I don't *dislike* FSOL -- indeed, they're quite pleasant enough to listen to, but at this point I've got about as much background music as I think I'll ever need, which is perhaps why my recent IDM purchases have been on the harder/more "foreground" end of the spectrum: X103, UR, CJ Bolland, etc., and why I'm (gasp) starting to buy a few rock records again. | Dave Walker, Detroit Art Services (DAS) | | "I don't read, I just guess" | | marmoset@msen.com -Happy Mondays, "Wrote For Luck" |

quoted 3 lines Alright, here we go. I agree that if any "techno" (if you can call

> Alright, here we go. I agree that if any "techno" (if you can call > it that) band deserves credit as being on the cutting edge, it is > FSoL. Accelerator was by far way ahead of it's time for 1991.

Oh I love nitpicking dates with people who have no idea what they're talking about. My "Papua New Guinea" single is dated 1992. Although "Accelerator" is (P) 1991, it was EXTREMELY hard to get a copy when it was first made available in the states in the spring of 1992. I honestly doubt it was readily available in England in 1991 if all. Isn't it odd how people yak about how something being fab zillions of years ago when they had nothing to do with the music at the time?

quoted 2 lines all. You have to be in the right frame of mind to understand

> all. You have to be in the right frame of mind to understand > Cascade, but it can really blow you away.

For someone who has only DJ'd "Papua New Guinea", I find your sudden acceptance of FSOL as 'brilliant' very surprising.

quoted 3 lines BTW, I've heard about this

> BTW, I've heard about this > "Lifeforms" album, is that their new unreleased album? Or is it an > older album that's hard to find?

It is the new album coming in March.