IDM Mailing Archive

1997-09-29 19:40Alexander Reynolds> Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 07:38:29 -0700 > From: "Gonzi 'Fresh' Merchan" <fresh@linkonline.

From:: Alexander Reynolds <polygon@jhu.edu>
To:: <idm@hyperreal.org>
Date:: Mon, 29 Sep 1997 15:40:50 -0400 (EDT)
Subject:: (idm) "authorship" vs. "credibility"

quoted 10 lines Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 07:38:29 -0700

> Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 07:38:29 -0700 > From: "Gonzi 'Fresh' Merchan" <fresh@linkonline.net> > Subject: Re: (idm) gonzi vs. bjoerk > > > Well, I have to jump in with my two cents here, if only because these > > "questions of authorship" are, in all essence, moot, if not ridiculous. > > Oh Alex. Questions of authorship are one of the most interesting issues > of electronic music - especially sample based music. At least I think so > at any rate. Nothing ridiculous about it.

Gonz, I agree with you, but you're getting your wires crossed. I meant in that postto imply that "authorship" as you and other idmers see it as really a discussion of credibility, which is, of course, subjective. Credibility as legitimacy, as in, who gets bragging rights on this list, and why (or more often, omitting reasons altogether and throwing in insults). IDM Lesson #1: Capital-A authorship is not credibility.

quoted 9 lines These folks are sampling, or using sampled sound, no? Since when were

> > These folks are sampling, or using sampled sound, no? Since when were > > Bjoerk, RDJ, Autechre, Cylob (well, he plays trombone, but rarely), et > > al., playing live instruments 100% of the time? These > > artists/thieves/whatever are all taking sound from other people (come on > > you slags) or equipment (303, anyone?). But this is academic, and anyone > > on this list should know that off the bat before making comments about > > "authorship." Especially you, Gonzi. > > Uhhh....now you're starting to split hairs.

No split hairs, man. These artists, including my heros Autechre (and your hero, Squarepusher), are quite literally thieves of the sonic variety. There's no way around it, really. Just the nature of the technology involved. Now you want to start to talk about why one thief is more legitimate a thief than the other, a la bjoerk vs. cylob. That's fine -- but (lesson #2) these two are both stealing their sound from other people. This is a fairly black and white reality. Every idmer should acknowledge this before making claims of which artist "keeps it real," a term wih absolutely no meaning in electronic music. Christ Gonz, you're a film student. I'm sure you've seen reels and reels of crappy Pulp Fiction ripoffs by other film students. I don't study film, and I know *I* have. There's a technique that goes down that everyone uses, a style. What makes thievery legitimate is how creative it is. The director for Swingers uses slow-motion as a film student reference to ResDogs and Raging Bull, but in a funny, tongue-in-cheek way. You can't compare bjoerk and cylob on creativity -- it's like comparing apples and oranges. You have to look at each on its own merits.

quoted 7 lines I'm not talking about who

> I'm not talking about who > makes the equipment (but who taught them to make the equipment, who > taught the person that taught him, aren't his parents really responsible > for him being here at all? You get the idea), I'm talking about who > writes the songs and who makes the music. It's not quite as complicated > as you're making it, it's right there in black and white in the liner > notes.

The liner notes omit (very often) the source of the sound. Alex Patterson is the only one with balls enough to credit other people, as far as I know. Which may not be alot, as it is -- if bjoerk and cylob have listed where their samples come from (come to think of it, cylob did mention rdj on cylobian sunset; anyways....) which they most likely haven't (or at least on a regular basis), then I stand corrected and humble.

quoted 3 lines How about some quality reviews, instead?

> > How about some quality reviews, instead? > > Show me yours and I'll show you mine. (I love that saying..)

Actually, Gonzi, my last three posts have been fairly lengthy reviews. I'll be on the lookout for those in-depth Bjoerk and Cylob reviews of yours... Alex

1997-09-29 20:56Lazlo Nibble> The liner notes omit (very often) the source of the sound. Alex Patterson > is the only

From:: Lazlo Nibble <lazlo@swcp.com>
To:: Intelligent Dance Music <idm@hyperreal.org>
Date:: Mon, 29 Sep 1997 14:56:20 -0600 (MDT)
Subject:: (idm) "authorship" vs. "credibility"

quoted 3 lines The liner notes omit (very often) the source of the sound. Alex Patterson

> The liner notes omit (very often) the source of the sound. Alex Patterson > is the only one with balls enough to credit other people, as far as I > know.

Sure, when he's threatened with a lawsuit . . . -- ::: Lazlo (lazlo@swcp.com; http://www.swcp.com/lazlo) ::: Internet Music Wantlists: http://www.swcp.com/lazlo/Wantlists

1997-09-29 22:09szalemandrethe problem is this list is made up of entirely too many music listeners, and not enough m

From:: szalemandre <szale@doubtful.com>
To:: Alexander Reynolds <polygon@jhu.edu>
Cc:: <idm@hyperreal.org>
Date:: Mon, 29 Sep 1997 18:09:40 -0400
Subject:: Re: (idm) "authorship" vs. "credibility"

the problem is this list is made up of entirely too many music listeners, and not enough musicians. nobody has a fucking clue. everybody chill. it's music when you get it into your hands or into your ears. -- .- Doubtful Productions Evolving Media -. eric sherman http://www.doubtful.com szale@doubtful.com

1997-09-30 04:33Alexander ReynoldsOn Mon, 29 Sep 1997, szalemandre wrote: > the problem is this list is made up of entirely

From:: Alexander Reynolds <polygon@jhu.edu>
To:: szalemandre <szale@doubtful.com>
Cc:: <idm@hyperreal.org>
Date:: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 00:33:42 -0400 (EDT)
Subject:: Re: (idm) "authorship" vs. "credibility"
Reply to:: Re: (idm) "authorship" vs. "credibility"

On Mon, 29 Sep 1997, szalemandre wrote:

quoted 2 lines the problem is this list is made up of entirely too many music

> the problem is this list is made up of entirely too many music > listeners, and not enough musicians.

if that's an insult directed at me, i have more appreciation for more varied types of music than most musicians will ever have in their whole life. from your lack of meaningful input, i'd have to catagorize you into that group. "that's no bullshit, neither." i spend a good majority of my non-rent, non-utility, etc. income on exploring different types of music. i read and write reviews. i lurk more than post. when i read ignoramuses fighting over which group is better, for reasons that are just laughable, my blood boils. if you're going to compare musicians, have a base that is rational. if bjoerk and cylob have anything in common, it's that they plug their instruments into the wall and enjoy it. that's about where any discussion or comparison of their sound starts and ends. their employment situation outside of the music has no bearing whatsoever. e.g., plug, et al. will not change because they get paid by nothing records. IDM (and other "underground" music) lesson #4: there is no conspiracy to take away the good music we all like to listen to and have it replaced by evil record producers. buy and listen to what you like. for me, this lesson was the hardest to learn. once i got over my paranoia i was a free man. you folks don't have to be slaves, either.

quoted 1 line nobody has a fucking clue.

> nobody has a fucking clue.

least of all you, by your heavy-handed attempt to jump on a high horse! i've been here awhile and have seen this masked thread before. i think i have a clue and that i have a right to voice it.

quoted 1 line everybody chill.

> everybody chill.

where's your music, mr. musician? what insight can you give that we lack?

quoted 1 line it's music when you get it into your hands or into your ears.

> it's music when you get it into your hands or into your ears.

um, thanks for the feel-good, bumper-sticker, meaningnless idm quote of the year. still doesn't address why this "mainstream" vs. "underground" thread keeps popping up, which i think has more to do with the kids trying to establish a pecking order than any real desire to discuss idm or music in general. i think when non-music thread participating-people here admit *truthfully* why they post, which is just to get attention and throw nasty words at each other like little children, there will be a much healthier climate on the list. then again, probably not. don't know why i bother anymore. this used to be a quality, low-noise list. i should join the ambient list again -- at least when they had disagreements, it was over something meaningful. alex

1997-09-30 21:38Anthony EwersI think eric 'szalemandre' <szale@doubtful.com> has a point. Speaking as a musician and so

From:: Anthony Ewers <anthony@phatmac.demon.co.uk>
To:: <idm@hyperreal.org>
Date:: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 21:38:52 +0000
Subject:: Re: (idm) "authorship" vs. "credibility"

I think eric 'szalemandre' <szale@doubtful.com> has a point. Speaking as a musician and someone who knows how to use gear, I've had the privallege to own/use a slew of electronic instruments since I was 11, and own my own studio (see my sig). For your thought you might consider reading a book (or at least part of it) called 'Mythologies', by a guy called Roland Barthes - he suggests basically that everything we create has been done before, in whole or in part... this applies to music, visual art, literature - any form of expression... We might copy re-create it explicitly by sampling someone elses work, or implicitly, perhaps by using the same instruments or style. An outfit like Autechre, in my mind fuses a kind of planned Jazz (without the improvisaion because its programmed) with electronica. Saying this I don't mean that the play trumpets, saxaphones, piano and double bass - what I'm talking about is musical structure and form. In real jazz the instruments/elements do battle against each other and there can be a kind of organised chaos - I think Autechre 'simply' recreate this kind of chaos with electronic instruments. It's a sad fact that some (technodroids) worry about what gear groups like Autechre use when really it doesn't matter. Because at the end of the day you can have the most powerful synth on the planet, or all the synths of your favourite electronic group - If you haven't got any creativity or skills of musical expression, you're going to produce music which is shite or just a copy of someone elses ideas. Some of the arguments on stealing/the use of sounds are pathetic. Synths samplers and 'real' instruments, i'd rather term them elctronic and acoustic instruments all have their limitions. Synths & samplers can offer:- more way out/ambient noises, a more varied palette sounds, the ability to make acoustic sounds do strange things - The limitations are poor/incomplete immitations of acoustic instruments, inflexibility of parameters beyond digital extremes and the MIDI/Manufacturers specification. But on the other hand acoustic instruments offer you more natural expression - and then nothing sounds more real than the real thing, nothing will instantly capture the naunces of playing like a real acoustic instrument - try to create a break on a drum machine perhaps overlaying the drum machine sounds with sampled drums it might take you hours and like a complete nerd afterwards you'll be suffering from button pushers finger, alpha dial wrist, or LCD eye! When a real drummer can come up with something in minutes if not seconds. Thats why people simply rather sample beats & sounds than create their own, but if they knew how to play or create... It's the same with styles of music, get your own, defy catogorisation! lwtcdi <graham@lwtcdi.prestel.co.uk> Writes:- Autechre are less guilty of stealing a particular sound than someone who physically 'plays' an instrument because they select sounds for their records based on lots of different sounds they make. In other words they sculpt the sound. Playing a 'real' instrument involves sound manipulation, but essentially the sound has already been defined. Bollocks, it seems you trying to suggest that synths somehow have a more expressive capability than 'real' acoustic instruments, why is it then that synths struggle to recreate the sound of acoustic instruments. What are synth sounds, if anything they are the ultimate in defined sounds. Bought to life by pages and pages of fucking parameters all revolving around the numbers between 0 and 128 as defined by the MIDI specification... Standard velocity key responses, offsets, tunings, MIDI channels, Pan, FX Routing, Filters, envelopes... Even on the most simple level you try hitting a key on a keyboard playing a bass guitar patch, sure the sound gets louder and the timbre of it changes the harder you hit it, if you did this on a real bass you'll get to the point where the string will break, playing a keyboard monotonises even your playing style (would you really play an ambient pad sound in exactly the same way as a slap bass). Synths create a world which define extremes and shift between them in a programmed fashion. The only instrument on the planet which can break such a monotony is *your* mind. PS: I'm well up for a slanging match with any of you IDM is my world types out there, so it there's life enough in ya, bring it on! ------------------------------------------------------------- Anthony Ewers Recording Artist Styles:- Drum & Bass / Trip Hop / House / Soul / Hip Hop. GEAR:- GENRALMUSIC S3 TURBO, AKAI S1000, YAMAHA MU90R, ALESIS DM5, ALESIS MIDIVERB 4, TASCAM DA-20, MACKIE 1402VLZ, APPLE QUADRA 610. Personal e-mail: anthony@phatmac.demon.co.uk Future By Design: future@phatmac.demon.co.uk Orders: orders@phatmac.demon.co.uk

1997-09-30 23:10Mark KolmarOn Tue, 30 Sep 1997, Anthony Ewers wrote: > Even on the most simple level you try hitting

From:: Mark Kolmar <mkolmar@xnet.com>
To:: Anthony Ewers <anthony@phatmac.demon.co.uk>
Cc:: <idm@hyperreal.org>
Date:: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 18:10:01 -0500 (CDT)
Subject:: Re: (idm) "authorship" vs. "credibility"
Reply to:: Re: (idm) "authorship" vs. "credibility"

On Tue, 30 Sep 1997, Anthony Ewers wrote:

quoted 5 lines Even on the most simple level you try hitting a key

> Even on the most simple level you try hitting a key > on a keyboard playing a bass guitar patch, sure the sound gets louder and > the timbre of it changes the harder you hit it, if you did this on a real > bass you'll get to the point where the string will break, playing a > keyboard monotonises even your playing style (would you really play an

I avoid playing keys. Instead, I program. The keyboard is useful for scales and harmonies of a conventional sort, and to trigger (and record) events. But it is a poor interface from which to coax nuance from electronic instruments. One needs either several hands or multiple passes to create even a simple acid bassline. Since I'm dealing mostly with timbre and rhythm, an interface built for a harpsichord ("velocity" came later with the piano) is a lousy front-end. --Mark __ <http://www.xnet.com/~mkolmar/BurningRome> < MPEG & RA audio clips > m u s i c : w e b : s o u n d d e s i g n : h t m l : c g i : e t c

Re: (idm) "authorship" vs. "credibility"