Re: [idm] How 'cutting edge'/difficult does IDM have to be?
Msg-Id:
<004101c3fcb8$fc994130$142d8e3e@laite>
Mbox:
idm.0402.gz
Welcome to the list.
quoted 2 lines How difficult to listen/noise-based/complicated/progressive does IDM> How difficult to listen/noise-based/complicated/progressive does IDM
> have to be?
Uh, have to be for what? To be IDM? To be good? Not difficult/complicated at
all, it can be very easily approachable or even one-dimensional, if that one
dimension is enjoyable...
The 'I' doesn't really stand for much else than aesthetics in my opinion.
But really, why do you think there is necessarily a connection between being
complicated or progressive and being difficult to listen to or stressful?
Not to mention, there is nothing complicated in randomness. For example
Lexaunculpt's rhythm programming is some of the most uninteresting I have
heard, no matter how ever-changing it is. I don't find Mira Calix to be in
any way complex either.
quoted 3 lines But I would still like to figure out where the Intelligent in the IDM name> But I would still like to figure out where the Intelligent in the IDM name
> ends and where 'banal', for lack of a better word, starts... I would love
> to see what you people think about this phenomenon.
Frankly speaking, I find the question a bit confusing. What 'phenomenon' are
you referring to? Or what do you mean by banal? Self-indulgent/pretentious
complexity, or what?
There is a good balance between complexity and immediate delight in
Apropra't which is IYO lacking in some Squarepusher's tracks, is this your
point? What, then, is the question? Comparing Calix, Pusher and S & S seems
a bit problematic to me in the first place, since they are all doing
completely different things...
Visa
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org
For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org