At 22:59 16/07/97 -0500, you wrote:
quoted 1 line sorry, but this is yet another posting about the chemical brothers.>sorry, but this is yet another posting about the chemical brothers.
oh no, not another one :-)
quoted 3 lines with the exception of a FEW people on this list, their>with the exception of a FEW people on this list, their
>isn't ANYONE that has their own record/CD being circulated by the thousands.
>(in the states, and overseas...)
well, there are a few.
quoted 4 lines of course there's the 70% that own a>of course there's the 70% that own a
>bunch of keyboards and samplers (and i'm not dismissing myself), and
>say how this sucks, and that sucks, and they're crankin' out shit at
>home that's totally incredible. so where's your material?
well, it's lying here on a digital tape! whether i want to release it or
not is a personal matter (as a matter of fact i'm pricing up pressing
plants as i type, but that's another story).
quoted 1 line (besides some cheesey low-rate sample on a homepage...)>(besides some cheesey low-rate sample on a homepage...)
yeah, why don't more people use mp3's? i think it could start a big change
in the scene. or at least when most people have cd burners or digital outs
on their computer so they can go and play high quality internet music on
their system or even in clubs - music hot off the press, and if you think
dubplates are 'roots', well....
quoted 5 lines let's see... i listen>let's see... i listen
>to the chemical brothers, and i also listen to luke vibert, freefrom,
>bentley rhythm ace, squarepusher, plug, cylob, paradinas, r. james,
>r. kirk, reload, gescom, autechre, etc... so i guess i'm not "intelligent"
>since i "threw" the chem bros. in there eh??
well that's a great line up there. all i can vouch for is my own tastes
and without trying to sound like a trendy snob (for want of a better
phrase) my own standards when it comes to music. i don't have a problem
with the chemical brothers *style*, i simply think their production and the
range of ideas is poor! i listen to a lot of music the chemical brothers
site as influences, i dig some beastie boys productions, i dig schooly d,
public enemy, i dig 70's funk like you wouldn't believe. the difference
between these and the chemical brothers is that on most of their tracks
they try to be all these things at once, and all they end up with is a
barrage of noise that hasn't got any *space* in it, and isn't
funk/dance/techno/electronic music 50% about the space? the production has
a pop aesthetic rather than an experimental one, which is why it sounds
right on the radio, right in the car, right on a student's cheap midi and
right in the pub. which, in turn, is why it sells, because all the pop
market wants is EASY LISTENING
quoted 1 line how can you say these guys suck?>how can you say these guys suck?
i just say what i think
quoted 2 lines the only time music actually "sucks," is when the "artist" isn't >the only time music actually "sucks," is when the "artist" isn't truly
>doing what they want.
maybe that is true in a way, but it isn't an objective world, and we only
have a limited time on this planet, yeah? we try, on the list, to bring
the spotlight on the music being made that is worthy, it's a general
consensus that swings the collective opinion - kind of like a little
society. if the majority like or don't like it, then that will have an
influence on people who are reading. if i can explain why i think people
shouldn't be buying this music, and other people agree and compound this
view (these people are numerous) then maybe people reading will understand,
and go for something 'better'. to have the view that no-one should attack
music they don't like, well, not everyone is that aloof.
quoted 1 line the chem bros. material is consistent and true to form.>the chem bros. material is consistent and true to form.
it's the form that is the problem. the chemical brothers never stick their
necks out, never seek to change people's musical view, they just give the
big crowd what they ask for - that's no way for a good musician to go about
it. if you hear something on the radio, maybe at work, or maybe in the
car, somewhere public, and you and the people around you want to hear the
whole thing through, then maybe that is a sign that the music is poor. it
should disturb you, disturb your consciousness, make you *listen* instead
of simply *hearing*. then you have to learn to appreciate it, and as a
result you gain something from it.
quoted 3 lines god forbid it isn't purely electronic (in a sense) and won't see>god forbid it isn't purely electronic (in a sense) and won't see
>a radio station for the next 5 years. (that's what
>makes this all intelligent...right???)
i'll be really obvious and say yes. uncommercial, innovative, even
underground. is the general public ready for rdj yet? the signs are there
- tv ads, chart records. this is the only way it can be. maybe it will be
true that rdj-style music will in the future be overground, and if rdj is
still doing the same thing (which he won't), he would hear the machinations
of the underground artists burrowing beneath his feet. i repeat - it's the
form that is the problem. those who change, develop and stick their necks
out are the ones who remain underground, innovative, uncommercial. if you
want to make money, that's easy, just give people what they want, and stick
to your formula - this is what the chemical brothers are doing.
quoted 2 lines just tired of seeing a group being "bashed">just tired of seeing a group being "bashed"
>because it doesn't have an "amen" break in one of its songs
don't we be bash them BECAUSE of this?
quoted 3 lines or they've been>or they've been
>interviewed by more than 2 magazines. (btw, magazines come to them, not the
>other way around. at least, most of the time...)
erm yes but you alone decide whether you want to co-operate.
quoted 2 lines ego-maniacs? yeah, their>ego-maniacs? yeah, their
>faces are plastered all over their videos.
never seen a video of theirs. but (and, of course, i'm talking about in
the uk) an issue of MM or NME never goes by without a big colour shot of
said brothers doing something. part of the pop machine.
quoted 2 lines read Keyboard or something, and>read Keyboard or something, and
>quit watching MTV if you're just gonna bitch about it.
don't watch mtv, or tv. and generally i'll only read sound on sound,
because the other mags are produced by complete wankers. at least in SOS
you get some technical depth to the articles
quoted 2 lines when i walk into Modern>when i walk into Modern
>Music and see YOUR CD on the wall, i'll personally drive to your house and
kiss
quoted 1 line your ass.>your ass.
well no thanks. i'd prefer it if you kissed the record. and i hope i
never get so commercial as to be producing COMPACT DISCS! BLEEEEEURGH!
quoted 2 lines until then, try to keep this list from becoming more myopic and ego->until then, try to keep this list from becoming more myopic and ego-
>maniacal than it already is...
nothing wrong with a bit of ego - ego gets you places.
quoted 1 line love that skampler>love that skampler
thought it was a pretty sad idea - WHAT would be WRONG with reissuing the
eps, instead of this grotesque half-baked 'extra tracks and a tacky badge'
concept? it might be a sampler, but who's going to buy this thing except
the spotters who have the eps already? i don't intend on paying 20
something quid or whatever on a couple of tunes from off the cutting room
floor (i'm not THAT devoted, hahaha)
cheerio!
np - demo sample from fourth world fw01 ep (yep, yep... put me down for a
copy)
oosalford
oosounds
xxwe want to hear your music! email!