179,854Messages
9,130Senders
30Years
342mboxes
Search · subject · body · from · to
Advanced search
reset

← archive index

Re: Trancemaster vs. Portishead

6 messages · 5 participants · spans 1 day · search this subject
◇ merged from 2 subjects: teex 3 · trancemaster vs. portishead
1994-10-28 05:37Teep Trancemaster vs. Portishead
1994-10-28 17:00TEEX 3
└─ 1994-10-28 18:41Hans Veneman Re: TEEX 3
└─ 1994-10-28 21:03Greg Earle Trancemaster vs. Portishead
├─ 1994-10-29 08:13Hans Veneman Re: Trancemaster vs. Portishead
└─ 1994-10-29 11:13Michel Battaglia Re: Trancemaster vs. Portishead
expand allcollapse allclick any summary to toggle that message
1994-10-28 05:37TeepTIME OUT > Anyway, the point is, there seem to be two camps in IDM (the list); the more >
From:
Teep
To:
Date:
Thu, 27 Oct 94 21:37:28 -800
Subject:
Trancemaster vs. Portishead
permalink · <9410290135.AA14744@MIT.EDU>
TIME OUT
quoted 3 lines Anyway, the point is, there seem to be two camps in IDM (the list); the more> Anyway, the point is, there seem to be two camps in IDM (the list); the more > Trance-oriented group (which I'll extend as far as to encompass, e.g., the > mu-Ziq lovers, of which I count myself)
that's one extension that i would HIGHLY disagree with, please name me one track other than *ad misericordiam* that is even remotely *trance*
quoted 4 lines and the more Gotta Have Da Funque-oriented group (no prizes for guessing who> and the more Gotta Have Da Funque-oriented group (no prizes for guessing who > are in this crew (-: ). I don't tend to see the former group dissing on the > latter here too often. But the latter group seem to take great glee in doing > the same to the former.
does anyone know what greg is talking about? i'm lost. i do know that there are a few dangerous generalizations flying around in a post that is sugar coated with rodney king quote???
quoted 2 lines In the words of that great late 20th Century philosopher, Rodney King (-:> In the words of that great late 20th Century philosopher, Rodney King (-: > "Can't we all just get along?"
sure we can! shall we start by forgiving the latter group from dissing the former? or shall we start by taking down the fence you just put up between the *two camps* actually, i'd prefer to pretend that this ugly thread was a nightmare (and i mean that, to all, please feel free to respond to me in private) Teep (aran@mit.edu) on now: dead alive :(fucking R rated version from Ballbuster video)
1994-10-28 17:00acnt@vax.ox.ac.ukI just bought TEEX 3 this lunchtime : I wasn't going to because although I liked some of t
From:
To:
Date:
Fri, 28 Oct 1994 17:00:23 +0000
Subject:
TEEX 3
permalink · <00986A0D.DCBD2504.28@vax.ox.ac.uk>
I just bought TEEX 3 this lunchtime : I wasn't going to because although I liked some of the other two, I thought they were a bit patchy. However the glowing testimonials on this list twisted my arm. I was glad to see that they have finally got Juan Atkins making a contribution : it was about time he showed up on this series. I also got the Portishead album, but that isn't really Intelligent dance music. Can anyone recommend any of the Trancemaster series ? Bye for now. Tom
1994-10-28 18:41Hans Veneman>showed up on this series. I also got the Portishead album, but that isn't >really Intelli
From:
Hans Veneman
To:
Date:
Fri, 28 Oct 94 18:41:52 GMT
Subject:
Re: TEEX 3
Reply to:
TEEX 3
permalink · <EJ3SCGXCUp@tv99ad.xs4all.nl>
quoted 3 lines showed up on this series. I also got the Portishead album, but that isn't>showed up on this series. I also got the Portishead album, but that isn't >really Intelligent dance music. >Can anyone recommend any of the Trancemaster series ?
The Portishead album is much more intelligent than the Trancemaster series ;) Cheerio, LowlHans -- +----------------------------+ | Hans Veneman | | veneman@tv99ad.xs4all.nl | | phone: +31(0)3200-35266 | +----------------------------+
1994-10-28 21:03Greg Earle>> I also got the Portishead album, but that isn't really Intelligent dance >> music. Can
From:
Greg Earle
To:
Date:
Fri, 28 Oct 1994 14:03:46 -0700
Subject:
Trancemaster vs. Portishead
Reply to:
Re: TEEX 3
permalink · <9410282103.AA02172@isolar.Tujunga.CA.US>
quoted 4 lines I also got the Portishead album, but that isn't really Intelligent dance>> I also got the Portishead album, but that isn't really Intelligent dance >> music. Can anyone recommend any of the Trancemaster series? > > The Portishead album is much more intelligent than the Trancemaster series ;)
Hans, what is this supposed to mean? (Even granting you the smiley) I have the first Trancemaster (I presume; it was called "Trancemaster Vol. I - Ambient Dance II Trance Chill Out). It came out 2 years ago and it had folks like Resistance D, Hypnotist, Irresistible Force, Frank De Wulf, Phobia, Dance 2 Trance, Komakino, Evolution and Speedy J. on it, among others. By the "Artificial Intelligence" anal weenie definition of "intelligent", this certainly qualifies. It was one of the best comps I bought that year. Classic tracks from Cyclotron, Suck Me Plazma, +8, Rising High and R&S on that comp. Meanwhile, we have Portishead described as: " ... sparse deep Hip-Hop beats, almost film soundtrack sounding tunes ... strings, organs ... very 50's and 60's and ... vocals by a very strong singer." Hip-hop? Strings? Organs? "50's and 60's"? VOCALS?!? This is supposed to be "much more intelligent"? How so? If I was in a particularly Drukman-ian mood (:-)) I'd call it "shite". IMHO, I wouldn't personally be caught dead buying anything with strings, organs and vocals on it. On the one hand, as far as something vaguely & remotely similar goes, I think Barry Adamson's "Moss Side Story" is a work of genius, but (a) that was 1987, and (b) I don't go around calling "Moss Side Story" IDM. But hey ... Anyway, the point is, there seem to be two camps in IDM (the list); the more Trance-oriented group (which I'll extend as far as to encompass, e.g., the mu-Ziq lovers, of which I count myself) and the more Gotta Have Da Funque-oriented group (no prizes for guessing who are in this crew (-: ). I don't tend to see the former group dissing on the latter here too often. But the latter group seem to take great glee in doing the same to the former. (cf. Jon's comments about liking mu-Ziq being an indicator of "low IQ" and it not being "Real Music"(TM).) In the words of that great late 20th Century philosopher, Rodney King (-: "Can't we all just get along?" - Greg
1994-10-29 08:13Hans VenemanIn <9410282103.AA02172@isolar.Tujunga.CA.US> you (Greg Earle ) wrote : >>> I also got the
From:
Hans Veneman
To:
Cc:
Date:
Sat, 29 Oct 94 08:13:32 GMT
Subject:
Re: Trancemaster vs. Portishead
Reply to:
Trancemaster vs. Portishead
permalink · <EJ4HFBWDUp@tv99ad.xs4all.nl>
In <9410282103.AA02172@isolar.Tujunga.CA.US> you (Greg Earle ) wrote :
quoted 11 lines I also got the Portishead album, but that isn't really Intelligent dance>>> I also got the Portishead album, but that isn't really Intelligent dance >>> music. Can anyone recommend any of the Trancemaster series? >> >> The Portishead album is much more intelligent than the Trancemaster series ;) > >Hans, what is this supposed to mean? (Even granting you the smiley) > >I have the first Trancemaster (I presume; it was called "Trancemaster Vol. I - >Ambient Dance II Trance Chill Out). It came out 2 years ago and it had folks >like Resistance D, Hypnotist, Irresistible Force, Frank De Wulf, Phobia, Dance >2 Trance, Komakino, Evolution and Speedy J. on it, among others.
I just wanted to say the Portishead album is brilliant and can also be called 'IDM' imho (not that i care what you want to call it anyway). And if you want to divide this mailing list in two camps that's your problem, i count myself to both groups then. Cheers, Hans -- +----------------------------+ | Hans Veneman | | veneman@tv99ad.xs4all.nl | | phone: +31(0)3200-35266 | +----------------------------+
1994-10-29 11:13Michel Battaglia> Meanwhile, we have Portishead described as: > > " ... sparse deep Hip-Hop beats, almost
From:
Michel Battaglia
To:
Greg Earle
Cc:
Date:
Sat, 29 Oct 1994 07:13:38 -0400 (EDT)
Subject:
Re: Trancemaster vs. Portishead
Reply to:
Trancemaster vs. Portishead
permalink · <Pine.3.89.9410290619.A4495-0100000@freenet3.scri.fsu.edu>
quoted 6 lines Meanwhile, we have Portishead described as:> Meanwhile, we have Portishead described as: > > " ... sparse deep Hip-Hop beats, almost film soundtrack sounding tunes ... > strings, organs ... very 50's and 60's and ... vocals by a very strong singer." > > Hip-hop? Strings? Organs? "50's and 60's"? VOCALS?!?
yeah, can you *stand* it? ;)
quoted 4 lines This is supposed to be "much more intelligent"? How so? If I was in a> > This is supposed to be "much more intelligent"? How so? If I was in a > particularly Drukman-ian mood (:-)) I'd call it "shite". IMHO, I wouldn't > personally be caught dead buying anything with strings, organs and vocals on
why not? what's wrong with strings organs and vocals?
quoted 3 lines it. On the one hand, as far as something vaguely & remotely similar goes, I> it. On the one hand, as far as something vaguely & remotely similar goes, I > think Barry Adamson's "Moss Side Story" is a work of genius, but (a) that was > 1987, and (b) I don't go around calling "Moss Side Story" IDM. But h
i was going to agree with you in saying that portishead is less 'intelligent' than that trance stuff, but i really disagree now thati think about it. the arrangement ads for a fantatstic mood. Plus, if you want to get technical, not only is it intelligent, it is dance music. some of us actually have non-electronic tastes.
quoted 4 lines Anyway, the point is, there seem to be two camps in IDM (the list); the more> Anyway, the point is, there seem to be two camps in IDM (the list); the more > Trance-oriented group (which I'll extend as far as to encompass, e.g., the > mu-Ziq lovers, of which I count myself) and the more Gotta Have Da > Funque-oriented group (no prizes for guessing who are in this crew (-: ).
I seem to belong to these two camps as well (tho i don't get the 'gotta have da funque' thing either. have you *heard* portishead or massive attack? or even la funk mob or Dj Shadow (who could even be called *ambient* even tho there's practically no9 bleepy noises in his stuff at all)
quoted 5 lines I don't tend to see the former group dissing on the latter here too often.> > I don't tend to see the former group dissing on the latter here too often. > But the latter group seem to take great glee in doing the same to the former. > (cf. Jon's comments about liking mu-Ziq being an indicator of "low IQ" and it > not being "Real Music"(TM).)
I haven't seen anyone else say anything about mu-ziq and low iq other than john , and he's certianly entitled to his opinion. Why do you insist on grouping us into these 'camps'? People can like what they want to like and it seems like everyone's idea of what is IDM and what isn't differs. and i think it makes a better list. mikebee