[idm] Re: How 'cutting edge'/difficult does IDM have to be?
Msg-Id:
<04dd01c3fd66$bd50da70$0201a8c0@chu>
Mbox:
idm.0402.gz
quoted 8 lines Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 23:01:52 +0100> Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 23:01:52 +0100
> To: idm@hyperreal.org
> From: saltimbocca@gmx.de
> Subject: How 'cutting edge'/difficult does IDM have to be?
> Message-Id: <627F05DC-68A7-11D8-A0BA-000393C80624@gmx.de>
>
> How difficult to listen/noise-based/complicated/progressive does IDM
> have to be?
Plod spring to mind immediately. Difficulty of listening has nothing to do
with how experimental or complex a piece of music is - that's a common
mistake which results in so much awful stupid self-regarding
harder-than-thou dspwankery.
quoted 2 lines From: Greg Baker <vacationtheory@yahoo.com>>
> From: Greg Baker <vacationtheory@yahoo.com>
<>
quoted 1 line Yeah, I've heard people categorize RDJ album and Lunatic Harness as drill> Yeah, I've heard people categorize RDJ album and Lunatic Harness as drill
'n' bass, but i dont get the connection. I thought drill 'n' bass was
supposed to be super harsh experimental drum 'n' bass... am i missing the
big picture here?
I think the word drill'n'bass was journalistic sarcasm (Reynolds?) which got
taken literally as some kind of hot new music genre by overseas Wire
subscribers. In any case like eggy said it's about dance music not for the
dancefloor which could well describe super harsh experimental drum 'n' bass.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org
For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org