179,854Messages
9,130Senders
30Years
342mboxes

← back to listing · view thread

From:
Brad Shelton
To:
Date:
Mon, 21 Apr 1997 11:26:05 -0500 (CDT)
Subject:
(idm) re: oval
Msg-Id:
<199704211626.LAA00494@sunset.net2.nlu.edu>
Mbox:
idm.9704.gz
quoted 14 lines Can anyone offer a reason why I should think of Oval as anything other>Can anyone offer a reason why I should think of Oval as anything other >than boring and a complete waste of time? I listened to their newest >album in a store today and found it to be INCREDIBLY repetitive and >stifling, every song seemed to be something along the lines of "obscured >and reverbed synth line with CD player skip-clicks skip-clicking along". >I even noticed a blatant sample from SAW II. Is this all one has to do to >have one's own CD out in stores everywhere?...scratch up RDJ CDs, use the >most cohesive but invariably out-of-synch sequences I can find, and then >rake in the dough? 90% of what I heard sounded like it could have been >nothing other than a mangled and skippy SAW II CD. > >I ended up purchasing "68 Million Shades" by Spring Heel Jack and I can >already tell it's not going to be leaving my CD carousel for a hella long >time.
I thoroughly enjoy Oval's work. But I'm sure I *wouldn't* if I my only contact was at a record-shop listening station. Definitely an involving style that requires close, careful listening to fully appreciate. Think about what you're saying (re: SAW II) in the context of the sampling/copyrighting thread of late. Oval isn't to be slammed for manipulating other people's works to their own ends any more than their vinyl-spinning counterparts are.