I'm just writing this because I've been thinking about it for quite
some time and I wonder what other people would have to say. I know
this has been discussed countless times before, but I feel that
perhaps I have some new thoughts to add, at least to those who might
not have thought about it before...
I know everyone has different views on what exactly "IDM" is or
isn't. I am operating here under the opinion that this list is not
about IDM; rather, IDM is about this list. IDM is defined by the
interests and likes of the people on this list. That's why there are
so many artists are capable of being called IDM. An person like the
ever-popular RDJ can make all sorts of different types of music with
his electronic means, and they're all pretty much considered IDM (ok,
some people might disagree there, but...)
Actually, I think IDM has nothing to do with types of music; rather
it was a reactionary movement, if you will, by a group of people who
found various styles of techno around the very early '90s to be
getting pretty boring. These people moved towards using the same
means to create more interesting (intelligent) music. Coming from
dance culture, it was supposed to be "more intelligent dance" ...
hence IDM.
I'm not an old-timer so maybe my perception of the whole thing is
skewed, but basically, I think IDM is therefore not a genre, but
rather more of a philosophy of sorts - music made with
turntables/electronics/computers/etc. doesn't have to be boring;
let's do something interesting with it. Of course, people have been
doing this for a very long time; IDM has more to do with a specific
generation and class of people, those who founded this list, and
those like them, back around the time this list was founded.
So while some people might say "only that new crunchy, glitchy sound
is *real* IDM," and others might say, "real IDM sounds like
autechre," and still others might say, "it has to be caustic and have
a melody," they're all right and they're all wrong. *nothing* is
IDM. The people on this list are IDM. We are all part of the
"intelligent dance *movement*", and it has little to do with dance or
intelligence anymore.
Which brings me to my next question: where is IDM going? where are
we all going? Over time, people leave the list, and new ones join.
Over time, there have been many diverse types of "IDM." Fingernail
and Cylob sound very different from Kid 606 and Richard Devine.
There are often overlappings. There are often anomalies where two
people who both really like one artist disagree completely about
another. Why? Because they are hearing different things that the
artists are doing that they like.
If I say I like Richard Devine's EP, someone else might say, "oh, you
have to hear all the other schematic stuff - you'll like that too!"
But I have heard it, and I don't like it as much; it doesn't suit my
tastes.
IDM is a movement, a collective mass of people with similar interests
in music. We are all still different and have different tastes. One
thing that we often complain about (some of us anyway) is "elitism."
I believe the elitism has nothing to do with IDM - all humans are
elitist. It simply is that ever-present feeling that what you have
or like is probably better than what other people have or like.
Country music fans are no less likely to be elitist about their
music. It's a human trait, not an IDM trait.
We all have to start recognizing that everyone on this list does
*not* necessarily like "crunchy beats." Everyone does not
necessarily *dislike* trance. We are all here for different reasons;
the one thing we all share is an interest in music.
Music does not progress. There is no such thing is "moving ahead" in
music. No matter the genre, no matter the style, the only things you
can ever measure are skill and taste. Over time, a saxophone player
will likely become better at what he does, but he may still play the
same style. His skill becomes better, but the music doesn't have to
change. The same goes for people like Autechre - their control over
sound; their skill with their "instruments," becomes better over
time, but their style doesn't *have* to change, although they may
choose to do so.
Such changes in style are not a progression, at least not int he
anthropomorphized sense of things becoming better and old things
being "out of date." Autechre's Incunabula is no more "behind the
times" than Miles Davis' Kind of Blue album. It's just one stage in
their career.
One style may be copied by many different artists, while the
originators move on, but moving on simply means "to different
things," not "to better, more important things." New does not
necessarily mean better. Progression does not exist; it is an
illusion.
The truth is simply that music expands; new styles and techniqes are
always being added. At the same time, a listener's experience and
ability to appreciate expands as well.
IDM is our social group's name for whatever we feel fits the ideals
of whatever it is we think we're about. Since everyone here has
different ideas about what the philosophy of IDM is supposed to be,
we often have clashes of opinion. I, for example, think that Future
Sound Of London would be fair game for discussion, while others might
think they're just a wanky techno/ambient group from the mid-90's.
What do you think IDM is? How do you define it so that a random
artist picked off the shelf of a record store can easily be
categorized as IDM or Not-IDM? I don't think you can. Some people
have complained on this list about "wanky indie-bands playing with
samplers and thinking they're IDM." Why not? What's wrong with
someone else using samplers and computers and whatever?
The whole idea of IDM, I always thought, was to push music open - to
open minds and destroy boundaries.
In the end, there is no such thing as an IDM artist. There are rock
musicians using computers and samplers and etc. to make music. I
would say most dance artists fit in this category. I especially
think Aphex is more of a IDM-ized rock artist than an IDM artist.
There are composers doing the same thing to make new compositions -
the john cages and philip glasses of the newer generations - autechre
I would place in this category. There is IDM-ized disco, IDM-ized
funk, IDM-ized soul, IDM-ized punk (kid-606 anyone?), IDM-ized rap,
IDM-ized indie-rock, etc. etc.
IDM is a movement. Not a genre. It is revitalizing music, and has
been for the past 10 years. It is not itself a genre, cut off from
all others. It is simply about doing new things with the new
options, as opposed to doing more of the same with the same old
instruments.
That's what I think, anyway. I hope I made some sense. What do you
all think? Is IDM a movement, encompassing all musical styles, or is
it a genre - if a genre, how would you define "IDM-ish music?" Or is
IDM simply a the name of discussion list and nothing more than that?
-adam
--
Adam Piontek [
http://www.tcinternet.net/users/damek/]
ICQ: 3456339 [damek@earthling.net]
... Foul water will quench fire. -- English Proverb (16th century)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org
For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org