I remember being in severely in love with an album by a band called Code
called Great Cities. Then they just disappeared off the planet.
----- Original Message -----
From: Adam Piontek <damek@earthling.net>
To: idm-list <idm@hyperreal.org>
Sent: Friday, November 03, 2000 1:41 AM
Subject: [idm] what is idm? where's it going?
quoted 144 lines I'm just writing this because I've been thinking about it for quite
> 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
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org
For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org