IDM Mailing Archive

quoted 7 lines I agree that FSOL came up with a new sound but I think the question is

>> >I agree that FSOL came up with a new sound but I think the question is >> >whether what's going on in Lifeforms really contitutes something new. >> >> can someone parse this sentence into english for me? > >It's english or pretty close as far as I can tell. I be happy to field >specific questions about the sentence.

you say it's "a new sound". then you say the question is whether it consitutes something new. so which is it? how can a new sound not be something new?? it seems axiomatic to me.

quoted 7 lines so, who else has done anything approaching that level of textural detail?

>> so, who else has done anything approaching that level of textural detail? > >There's a actually quite a few people who broke ground in sampling and >manipulation about 80 years ago...as soon as I find the books I have on >it I'll post the titles...they're really quite interesting. More recently >there's been more so called avant-garde classical doing the very same >thing for years. Probably not an the same textural tip, I agree.

what exactly are we talking about here? messaien? ligeti? i mean, i would never try to claim that they are not textural composers, but it's hardly the same sort of thing. so therefore FSOL still wins in the newness/innovation category. obviously they didn't invent an entire style of music out of whole cloth, but i think Lifeforms definitely is a big advance on the stuff that was coming out around the same time as it.

quoted 4 lines My

> My >question was does Lifeforms do anything but create texture for its own >sake. That's been done and redone sans all the sampling glitz for >centuries.

my personal answer is yes. however, this is not something anybody can answer definitively. the sound and music of Lifeforms MOVES me, emotionally. it may not move you. i say that's your loss but such subjective opinions are hardly valid criteria for judging a work innovative or otherwise. i mean, there are several qualities to examine in a work of music, particularly one in the idm arena: - emotional content - production quality - timbral innovation - conceptual innovation are just a few that i can think of off the top of my head. for me, FSOL gets full marks in all categories.

quoted 8 lines This I have to agree with by all means but anything not made by some kid

>> >This I have to agree with by all means but anything not made by some kid >> >on his power mac, ie anything produced at high volume's gonna sound better >> >at that same high volume. >> >> do you know anything about music production? >> >Probably a great deal more than you think judging from your kind of sad >little prodding. Had a bad day did we?

not particularly. but your comment belies a great ignorance about music production. matching volume levels is not some magic formula for getting good sound.

quoted 11 lines My point about Lifeforms and this applies to no other of FSOL's releases

>My point about Lifeforms and this applies to no other of FSOL's releases >is this: I have listened top those two cd's a number of times since they >came out and I am impressed with the ammount of equipment and quality of >equipment they must have used to produce it and am impressed by some of >their ideas. I have never though, really enjoyed Lifeforms as I do a lot >of other music. It has always seemed to me to be an attempt to push the >envelope which is, as most such attempt's are, a rehash of a lot of other >things whic came before it. It is therefore kind of disappointing to me. >Given the ammount of time and effort it seems was put into those tracks I >would have been elated if they really did show us a whole new place to >go. I doesn't

in your opinion. and so far nobody has posted a single name that i would consider a precursor to FSOL. they really seem to be in their own galaxy - ESPECIALLY on lifeforms. (ISDN is a little more influenced by other stuff) -jon on now: meat beat manifesto (subliminal sandwich)