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

← back to listing · view thread

From:
Chris Fahey
To:
'idm@hyperreal.org'
Date:
Tue, 14 Mar 2000 18:23:50 -0500
Subject:
RE: (idm) some thoughts on lo-fi improvisation
Msg-Id:
<D79909C367EAD3118D3E00508B9B0EF59FA3@NYC3MSG01>
Mbox:
idm.0003.gz
quoted 18 lines -----Original Message-----> -----Original Message----- > From: Glenn Bach [mailto:gbach@csulb.edu] > Subject: (idm) some thoughts on lo-fi improvisation > > > But what happens when > electronic music is removed from the context of the high-tech > and placed > in the realm of the lo-fi? When electronic signals, > originating from a > drum machine or an old analog synth for example, are directed not > through a sequencer or sound processing software but through > a chain of > guitar effects pedals? Or the vibrations from the strings of a bass > guitar are transformed to the point that they resemble electronic or > digital sound? What happens when electronic music is approximated or > referenced, lifting it from the linearity of tracks unfolding to the > grid represented by the software interface?
My understanding is that the methodology you speak of enjoys widespread practice today by a wide variety of musicians, in the worlds of electronic music, rock, and in experimental forms. The distinction you make between "grid music" and "lo-fi" is one we're only recently seeing come into existence. Most electronic musicians I know of employ a vast array of lo-fi or analog effects devices. Sometimes they do this because they swear that the devices in question are the only way to acheive a certain sound, sometimes they do this because they don't understand computers very well, sometimes they do it because they like a varied range of tools at their disposal to spur and enable their creativity. In any event, you create the impression that most current electronic musicians are desktop composers, while I would argue that this type of musician is relatively new, You mention prog-rock, but I'm not sure if you mean it as in Yes or whether you mean stuff like Can. There are literally hundreds of artists from the 60s, 70s, and 80s who created high-tech music without using anything even resembling a sequencer. Back then they used tape loops instead of samplers. And the tools were pretty primitive too. Old analog synths were self-contained instruments, and earlier models were just patch bays and knobs. I saw a band once(the motor morons as I recall ) where one member had nothing but a single-string bass and another member had about thirty effects pedals, patch cords, and duct tape and spent the whole show fucking with them all. But even 'uber-anti-IDM' folks like Jimmy Hendrix and the Beatles did the kinds of things you mentioned, from Hendrix on stage exploiting feedback to the studio-level trickery on Sgt. Pepper. Or the Beach Boys. Or anything produced by Phil Spector. And these are the mainstream people. Listen to Can or Lee Perry for more of such innovation from our elders. And of course there's IDM's underappreciated ancestor, hip hop, where the revolutionary history of turntablism (an analog art if there ever was one) exists in parallel and in combination with the just-as-revolutionary history of sampling and sequencing. As far as current IDMish artists go, I've seen a few (not enough) with live shows that transcend the laptop into the analog-but-still-not-exactly-rock from Data'chi to Panasonic --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org