quoted 2 lines They credited the song to SAW II, why is this? Did he throw that> They credited the song to SAW II, why is this? Did he throw that
> onto SAW II?
Perhaps he talked it over with Warp and decided it was a good idea. Maybe
he felt that "On" was a good enough track that it should appear on an
album, thus gaining some permanence, and not a single that will be deleted
in a few months.
quoted 3 lines For a man who claims to have written >10,000 pieces as one>For a man who claims to have written >10,000 pieces as one
> person said (who was that person, and am I quoting him right?) I find this
> self-contradictory.
I don't at all. "On" is an above-average track for RDJ, and I think putting
it on the album rather than a substandard track is a step in the right
direction away from "release any old track even if it isn't that great."
quoted 4 lines Oh yeah, what do people think about his statement that>Oh yeah, what do people think about his statement that
> he can't name all his songs because he has written too many? Is this
> bullshit or what! Even assuming that he _has_ written >10,000 songs, he
> could still take a few minutes more to name the songs that he _releases_!
Music is nonverbal. I don't think it's outrageous not to title a piece
of music (and even though I hate comparisons between techno and classical
music, how many pieces from that era have "titles" like "Piano Concerto
#5"?). Like Derrick May said, "It Is What It Is" (and interestingly,
that track's remix appears on the 'Transmat Relics' comp under the title
"MS 6," after the cat number of the 12" the track was on).
quoted 1 line It's quite annoying to have to refer to a song as 00.08351387.563^23....> It's quite annoying to have to refer to a song as 00.08351387.563^23....
If it only takes a few minutes to name a song, why don't you do it yourself?
There's nothing stopping you from coming up with your own titles.
C.
--
(Chris.Hilker) cspot@netcom.com