quoted 7 lines I do agree that WT2 is not as sophisticated or as
>I do agree that WT2 is not as sophisticated or as
>well produced as IE, but I think it still has a
>place. I don't know that I would describe it as
>lame or generic, but I would agree it is pretty
>repetitive and Jeff Mills derivitive... but there're
>a lot worse it could be. If you didn't buy
>things because they were Mills-derived there are backquoted 4 lines catalogs of entire record labels you would never
>catalogs of entire record labels you would never
>own. Neither of Jeff Mills Waveform Transmissions
>records are as sophisticated or well produced as the
>PurposeMaker comp., but they still have a place in myquoted 1 line collection too.
>collection too.
Well, I don't really agree... WT1 is one of my
favorite records (only heard 3 in the store, thought
it was alright but not as good as WT1) and the reason
I bought vol. 2. WT1 is excellently produced I think
- it sounds fucking rugged as hell (like it's supposed
to), with big kicks and bigger basslines and lots of
synthesized mayhem. WT2 is thin and uninteresting.
Maybe that's because I have WT1 on LP and WT2 on CD,
but it seems a little too extreme a difference for
that to be the whole reason...
What are the PurposeMaker records like? Are they
"soulful"? (I hate "soulful" Mills records).
=====
the humble abbott arthur purvis set his hand hereto
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org
For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org