IDM Mailing Archive

1. Jungle artists who think they're jazz musicians. I'm listening to the new Peshay record right now, and it sounds like typical bland fodder similar to whatever Roni Size and 4 Hero have been doing... I mean it's nice stuff and all, but damnit I miss all that eerie time-stretching beats'n bass craziness from way back..... 2. It suddenly dawned on me last night that Plaid records suck balls compared to Black Dog records.... Ed and Andy definitely can write esthetically-pleasing music, but it has no soul. 3. Fuck polyrhythms. As far as I can tell, the whole Lexaunculpt/Schematic/Funkstorung/ Chocolate Industries/whatever genre is heinously supersaturated..... if I hear another record that's just filtered PC tracker beats... I'll pull my lungs out. Great on a programming tip, for sure, but for christ's sake I need a melody or something... ten years from now The Wire is going to write a 5 page article about how this particular genre simply reflected the burgeoning popularity of home computers and shareware software vs. the increased interaction and accessibility of an end user to music distribution and promotion. Blah fodder more like. As far as I can see, Autechre had their three years on top, and their output is shite now. At least Arovane, Colongib and Richard Devine provide some sort of relief. But I'll still buy jungle records. And I'll still buy Plaid records. And I'll still buy every Schematic record... *sigh* Aaron np: theorem - nano (plus 8)

On 22 Aug 99, Aaron S Michelson wrote re: (idm) three things that piss me off:

quoted 1 line And I'll still buy Plaid records.

> And I'll still buy Plaid records.

Bit harsh on the Plaid boys there, but in general your mail has a point (or three). I * ~ you can also mail me at <lime909@hotmail.com>

quoted 5 lines 2. It suddenly dawned on me last night that

> 2. It suddenly dawned on me last night that > Plaid records suck balls compared to Black > Dog records.... Ed and Andy definitely can > write esthetically-pleasing music, but it > has no soul.

Oh yes it does... it's just covered up in over-produced niceness. The tunes are still good.

quoted 9 lines 3. Fuck polyrhythms. As far as I can tell,

> 3. Fuck polyrhythms. As far as I can tell, > the whole Lexaunculpt/Schematic/Funkstorung/ > Chocolate Industries/whatever genre is > heinously supersaturated..... if I hear > another record that's just filtered PC > tracker beats... I'll pull my lungs out. > Great on a programming tip, for sure, but > for christ's sake I need a melody or > something...

I have to say, the small amount of material in this genre I've heard, I've not been impressed with. Some of it has got melodies, but they're mostly crap. If you take away all the ticking, clicking scratchy bollocks you just get left with a tune a chimpanzee left to play with a cell-phone could come up with.

quoted 8 lines ten years from now The Wire

> ten years from now The Wire > is going to write a 5 page article about > how this particular genre simply reflected > the burgeoning popularity of home computers > and shareware software vs. the increased > interaction and accessibility of an end > user to music distribution and promotion. > Blah fodder more like.

I suppose it's better than the situation 5 or 10 years ago when music kit cost several limbs and a granny. Give it a year or two.. maybe it will settle down??

quoted 9 lines As far as I can see,

> As far as I can see, > Autechre had their three years on top, and > their output is shite now. At least Arovane, > Colongib and Richard Devine provide some > sort of relief. > > But I'll still buy jungle records. > And I'll still buy Plaid records. > And I'll still buy every Schematic record...

You didn't say if you'd buy Autechre ones?

I don't see why everyone's so hysterical about tunes. There seems to be some sugestion that the tune (ie the order of frequencies of sound waves) is in some way 'primary', and that the rhythms underneath it, the type of sound used, the degree of dsp buggery and so on are just decorations. I'm probably talking crap (no change there) but people seem to treat the tune with a ridiculous reverence - this thing that the tune should stand alone out of the context of the track - Why? Think of a synth: its got loads of controls; pulsewidth, ring mod, volume envelope, resonance... they all affect one aspect of the sound. But for some reason, the one that effects the pitch (the sequencer / keyboard) is important where all of the others aren't. End Melodic Fascism Jorkens

On Sun, 22 Aug 1999 TheevilD@aol.com wrote:

quoted 5 lines I don't see why everyone's so hysterical about tunes. There seems to be some

> > I don't see why everyone's so hysterical about tunes. There seems to be some > sugestion that the tune (ie the order of frequencies of sound waves) is in > some way 'primary', and that the rhythms underneath it, the type of sound > used, the degree of dsp buggery and so on are just decorations.

That view of melody (or more generally harmonic progression) is the cornerstone of western music. It took Africa (and African Americans) to bring rhythm and drums up to where they are co-equal with harmony in Western Music. When you hear a melody it has an emotional resonance that is, for most people, lacking in pure rhythm music. But that doesn't need to be the case -- when a good DJ drops "The Bells" by Jeff Mills into a set, you would need a heart of stone to resist the propulsive mood of that track. I personally am so attracted to Dance music because it emphasises rhythm and sound design over melody. When someone can really mesh harmony and rhythm (i.e. Muziq on a good day), it's a bonus. I don't think that regarding rhythm and DSP buggery as peripheral to harmony is that common among IDM list members frankly. But when an artist is able to work with harmonic progressions in that context, people notice it and comment on it.

quoted 2 lines But if you take away the "crap melodies" and leave in the "ticking, clickin

>But if you take away the "crap melodies" and leave in the "ticking, clicking >scratchy bollocks" it still remains pretty interesting though.

To you, maybe. ObTroll: What does the "M" stand for in "IDM," again? C.

:>But if you take away the "crap melodies" and leave in the "ticking, clicking :>scratchy bollocks" it still remains pretty interesting though. : :To you, maybe. : :ObTroll: What does the "M" stand for in "IDM," again? : :C. Ever listened to John Cage? Anyhow, if you're getting picky, when did you last 'D' to Autechre. What did the 'I' stand for again ; )

But if you take away the "crap melodies" and leave in the "ticking, clicking scratchy bollocks" it still remains pretty interesting though. Andrei

quoted 5 lines I have to say, the small amount of material in this genre I've heard, I've

> I have to say, the small amount of material in this genre I've heard, I've > not been impressed with. Some of it has got melodies, but they're mostly > crap. If you take away all the ticking, clicking scratchy bollocks you just > get left with a tune a chimpanzee left to play with a cell-phone could come > up with.

Drusca <drusca@erols.com> writes:

quoted 3 lines I guess you're not a subscriber to the (post-)Futurist/Cagean views of

>>I guess you're not a subscriber to the (post-)Futurist/Cagean views of >>what is >>considered to be of "musical" value.

I'm certainly NOT a subscriber to Cage's view! (I *am*, however, a subscriber to this list, as of about 30 minutes ago, so I don't know where this thread has been. Nice to meet you.) Cage couldn't have had a simpler view: He believed *all* sound has musical value. Cage didn't just liberate music from melody. (Actually art music was well liberated from melody already when he was born; it was a trend started by Wagner's non-repetition of phrases in "Tristan und Isolde" and completed by WWI-era primitivists, by composers of machine music, and rhetorically by the Italian futurists.) Cage, aesthetically and politically an anarchist, liberated music from intentionality, scores, musicians, and the orchestra itself. He rebelled against the restrictions that weighed down neoclassical music (and against his teacher, Schoenberg, who told him he didn't have any sense of tonality). I think Cage was probably the most important experimentalist ever. BUT his aesthetic system ("all sound--intentional or not--is musical") is a pretty lame one, imo. To be sure, all sounds can be considered artistically. But I think "music" has to be reserved for something separate from the buzzing noise of the computer terminal I sit in front of. If noise is music, then everything is music (everything is intrinsically noisy), and music, as an art form, loses its virtue. I think there's something fundamentally different in the way a Bruckner symphony or an Autechre track affects my mind than the sound of my breathing (a sound I hear every moment of my life) or other nonintentional noises that Cage would class as music. The word "music" loses all its meaning in the Cagean aesthetic.

quoted 6 lines One thing that tape/electronic music has demonstrated is that you can

>>One thing that tape/electronic music has demonstrated is that you can >>create a >>piece through non-melodic motivic development (i.e. Pierre Henry,etc., >>etc.). I >>always assume that people have come to terms with this concept and I find it >>puzzling when people on this list start arguing about melodic content, etc..

IDM seems to be an outgrowth of Detroit techno and early European electro/new age. As such, I think it's going through the exact same growing pains classical music went through early this century--deemphasizing melody, using machines as instruments, using real-world noise as a template for ambient music, etc. I agree with the above. Everyone who's not into electronic music, for example, seems to think that it's way too repetitive. (E.g., years ago I worked at RadioShack and was playing jungle and I had two customers tell me that the cd player was skipping--it wasn't, of course.) THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT! Trance, house, jungle, etc are supposed to be repetitive, and noise is supposed to be noisy. It's a whole different way of looking at music than the folk idiom which requires simple repeated melodic phrases. And it's great. kevin mr.

ChairCrusher wrote:

quoted 4 lines That view of melody (or more generally harmonic progression) is the

> That view of melody (or more generally harmonic progression) is the > cornerstone of western music. It took Africa (and African Americans) to > bring rhythm and drums up to where they are co-equal with harmony > in Western Music.

I think rhythm & melody were on a equal level in Western music before the introduction of African (or Asian) rhythms. There was a lot of rhythmic intricacy in medieval music (check out Machaut & the whole Ars Nova period) and then of course much later Stravinsky did some amazing stuff. Schoenberg and Webern were also very rhythmically sophisticated though in more subtle ways. Even listen to Beethoven's 5th, I definitely think the rhythmic development in that piece is just as important as the melodic development. Even Brahms is famous for doing a lot of 3 against 2 stuff. I think what Africa did is introduce the west to different rhythmic patterns and "feels" and the emphasis of different beats (2 & 4 vs. 1 & 3). Andrei

On Mon, 23 Aug 1999, Drusca wrote:

quoted 11 lines ChairCrusher wrote:

> ChairCrusher wrote: > > > That view of melody (or more generally harmonic progression) is the > > cornerstone of western music. It took Africa (and African Americans) to > > bring rhythm and drums up to where they are co-equal with harmony > > in Western Music. > > I think rhythm & melody were on a equal level in Western music before the > introduction of African (or Asian) rhythms. There was a lot of rhythmic > intricacy in medieval music (check out Machaut & the whole Ars Nova > period) and then of course much later Stravinsky did some amazing stuff.

Stravinsky was directly influenced by hearing African music in Paris. Just as Picasso was by seeing African ritual masks.

quoted 3 lines Even listen to Beethoven's 5th, I definitely think

> Even listen to Beethoven's 5th, I definitely think > the rhythmic development in that piece is just as important as the melodic > development. Even Brahms is famous for doing a lot of 3 against 2 stuff.

It's not that rhythm is absent from Classical Music, but that it is in most cases subservient to harmony. Bach wrote dance music too, but it's definitely not about jacking your body.

quoted 3 lines I think what Africa did is introduce the west to different rhythmic

> I think what Africa did is introduce the west to different rhythmic > patterns and "feels" and the emphasis of different beats (2 & 4 vs. 1 & 3). >

That's what I'm talking about. The whole primacy of syncopation and swing in music made in this century has a direct African lineage. The 'Bo Diddley' rhythm goes back straight to Yoruba chants, and can be heard everywhere, from Cuba to Brazil to Memphis.

Kevin Ryan wrote:

quoted 6 lines (Actually art music was well liberated from melody already

> (Actually art music was well liberated from melody already > when he was born; it was a trend started by > Wagner's non-repetition of phrases in "Tristan und > Isolde" and completed by WWI-era primitivists, > by composers of machine music, and rhetorically by > the Italian futurists.)

How does non-repetition lead to liberation of melody ? As far as I know Wagner wrote some very memorable melodies. And I think the Futurists (or any of these people for that matter) wanted to expand the concept of melody not obliterate it. Actually, if you listen to a lot of the music of the Futurists you find that it's pretty tame stuff (check out the "Musica Futurista" comp on Cramps).

quoted 4 lines Cage rebelled against the restrictions that

> Cage rebelled against the restrictions that > weighed down neoclassical music (and against his > teacher, Schoenberg, who told him he didn't have > any sense of tonality).

Harmony, not tonality. Schoenberg also said Cage was a conceptual genius though.

quoted 3 lines BUT his aesthetic system

> BUT his aesthetic system > ("all sound--intentional or not--is musical") is > a pretty lame one, imo.

It's kind of funny to dismiss the theories of a highly, highly intelligent man like Cage by simply calling them "lame". I think when someone like Cage says something like that you kind of have to trust that he's onto something. Maybe we don't really see what he means yet, but... Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, but this man's influence on the Western musical world is so great that it's almost unimaginable to think what things would be like had he not existed. I don't know, I just think Cage was an absolute fucking genius.

quoted 2 lines IDM seems to be an outgrowth of Detroit techno

> IDM seems to be an outgrowth of Detroit techno > and early European electro/new age.

Sure, but Rob & Sean don't seem to miss any opportunity to praise the work of Parmegiani and Jenkinson mentions Cage and Ligeti a lot these days. And it's known that Aphex has been listening to 20th century classical since his teenage years.

quoted 1 line Trance, house, jungle, etc are supposed to be repetitive,

> Trance, house, jungle, etc are supposed to be repetitive,

Says who ? Andrei

TheevilD@aol.com wrote:

quoted 4 lines I don't see why everyone's so hysterical about tunes. There seems to be some

> I don't see why everyone's so hysterical about tunes. There seems to be some > sugestion that the tune (ie the order of frequencies of sound waves) is in > some way 'primary', and that the rhythms underneath it, the type of sound > used, the degree of dsp buggery and so on are just decorations. I'm

one of the things that listening to the schematic stuff did to me is to be wayyyy more critical with the beats i listen to. nowadays i laugh at overly simplistic beats, unless they're _really_ groovy. (& even then!) so i would tend to agree on you there. however, not liking a song because it doesn't have enough of a tune is merely a matter of taste, so i don't see any reason to either champion or criticize it. but as far as schematic beats go... some bore me, but some are quite nice &, in a sense, 'melodic'. you also have to take into account that in most people's minds (mine included), beat supports melody, not the other way around. we might eventually get accustomed to a different way of doing it, but in the meantime, well, percussion hits, & tones bring melody. it'll take a while to change that. -- david