179,854Messages
9,130Senders
30Years
342mboxes

← back to listing · view thread

From:
Jeffrey Kihn
To:
Date:
Sat, 10 Sep 1994 00:02:31 -0700
Subject:
Re: music making
Msg-Id:
<199409100702.AA29705@locusts.berkeley.edu>
Mbox:
idm.9409.gz
I usually don't get involved in these discussions, but I just have a quick note that really is pretty inconsequential. The thing that I find to be the "problem" with ambient is that it easily rides that fine line between being "good: because it's inspired and stimulating to listen to" and "good: just because it's so darn aesthetically pleasing". For example, I think Paul Schutze is great, really original and interesting to listen to, but a lot of the time I just want to listen to something that sounds good, and so (say) the new Autocreation will end up on my stereo instead. Not as inspired, but enjoyable nonetheless. At least for me. =) In contrast to Pomme Fritz, which is great and all, but I just don't want to listen to it. How is one guy's hold-down-a-note-for-an-hour song better than another guy's hold-down-a-note-for-an-hour song? Maybe Harold Budd can't play piano at all and the bits we hear on the CD's are just the bits when he gets lucky. At any rate, it's possible to go way too far with this. Each piece of music must be judged on its own merits... Right? --Jeff