IDM Mailing Archive

quoted 4 lines I second most of the above (though I don't necessarily think Hotel ||

>I second most of the above (though I don't necessarily think Hotel || >lives up to the hype, a shortcoming that "Plays" renders pretty moot). >However, if Hotel Parallel is "probably the best record on Mego," what >does that make "Fennesz Plays"? Chopped liver?

I DON'T UNDERSTAND THIS. i've read endless praise of "fennesz plays," and while i don't think it's a "bad" record per se, i find it mostly without distinction beyond the goofy pop tie-in (which at any rate i can locate nowhere but in the song titles). whereas "hotel paral.lel" strikes me as a complex, intricate, varied, masterful work of lasting beauty etc. same goes for his first ep, "instrument," which held up next to "plays" makes the latter seem beyond pointless... what's the fucking deal? can somebody tell me what about "plays" they think is so special? i've never felt compelled to listen to it more than the one or two times it took to come to terms with it, and an additional dozen or so times to try and understand (fruitlessly) what about it everybody seems to love so much... help! sc p.s. i agree that comparing fennesz to f.m. is lazy and convenient ("they're both on mego!"), but then i'd say that same of comparing him to seefeel ("they both use guitars!")...

On Tue, 31 Aug 1999, Sean Cooper wrote:

quoted 2 lines what's the fucking deal? can somebody tell me what about "plays" they think

> what's the fucking deal? can somebody tell me what about "plays" they think > is so special? i've never felt compelled to listen to it more than the one

I dunno, I think my reaction is particularly strong just because I've listened _a lot_ to _Pet Sounds_. Here's some junk recycled from an e-mail to another list (apologies for the regurgitation, but hey): "It's comprised of two covers, which don't really seem to be based on samples of the originals as I expected. Rather an entirely different framework is constructed out of guitar, digital noise and [other] samples which are arranged such that some essence of the original manages to peek through. In particular "Don't Talk" has some original ghostly quality that must be taken from a sample of a vocal glissando from the original record (rendered so brief and timestretched to make it sound like a weird, microtonal modulation). Whether or not this is the actual methodology employed, it splits the listening experience into the part of you that recognizes and strains to make sense of the familiar Beach Boys part and the one that takes in all the rest. Comparable to any weird half-sleeping state you may find yourself in and shockingly artful."

quoted 3 lines p.s. i agree that comparing fennesz to f.m. is lazy and convenient

> p.s. i agree that comparing fennesz to f.m. is lazy and convenient > ("they're both on mego!"), but then i'd say that same of comparing him to > seefeel ("they both use guitars!")...

I just want to clarify that the original intent of the comparison was a RIYL one and it struck me that Seefeel was a much better litmus than FM. This is generally because I view both of 'em as safe bets for the shoegaze fan who's run out of Chapterhouse mixes to run down (I always associated early Seefeel with the post-Valentines explosion of early 90s, whereas Fennesz did his time peering out of the soft focus lens of Maische). Both F and SF believe(d) that there's something beautiful about draping things with wisps of euphonious etherea, although that's not the only reason to like either (obviously). -rob np- Doc Watson '64-68 (Vanguard comp with 4 prev unreleased cuts!)