IDM Mailing Archive

I can relate, a great deal, to what you're saying. I find myself into music for the music only. Sure if the lyrics to some song are great or something, I won't fail to mention it or discredit it or whatever. But for the most part, they could be giving me step-by-step instructions on how to win the Publishers' Clearing House Sweepstakes for all I care...

On 26 Jun 99, Jeremy J Graham wrote re: Re: (idm) listening to music...:

quoted 1 line I find myself into music for the music only.

> I find myself into music for the music only.

Absolutely - though that being said, I recently went to an 80s theme party, and the floor was packed with people ALL ages and we were all somehow singing along with the lyrics... Maybe they subliminally worm their way into our heads! Had a great time :-) I * np : monolake : interstate

quoted 1 line I find myself into music for the music only.

> I find myself into music for the music only.

As a hip-hop, Tricky, Sonic Youth, Marley, etc. fan, i find lyrics rather important. Though if a song's got lyrics and they're weak, it will usually detract from the overall value of the song, moreso than if it had been an instrumental, at least to some degree, depending on the qualituy of the delivery of the whack lyrics. But good lyrics are always a plus in vocal music, hence my appreciation for Eve 6's "Inside Out." _________________________________ Adam Roesch / roesch@augsburg.edu University of Idaho / Moscow / ID / USA Visit my Fila Brazillia/Pork Recordings fan site: http://dogbert.augsburg.edu/~roesch/pork/ "Because success needs killing" TRICKY

On Sat, 26 Jun 1999 13:05:09 -0700 (PDT), you wrote:

quoted 5 lines I get dinged by my friends when there's a pop song on the radio that I like.

>I get dinged by my friends when there's a pop song on the radio that I like. >Usually because of the full distored guitar sounds, the mix, or whatever. I >tell them i like a song and they say, yeah but the lyrics suck..."oh, i never >really bothered to pay attention to what they were saying, i'm just listening >to how it sounds..."

I know what you mean. I don't exclusively listen to IDM, although it probably accounts for about 70% of stuff in my collection. All the non-IDM stuff I'm into I've bought largely because it *sounds* good, rather than for any meaningful lyrical content or song structure. I always did prefer the female voice to the male voice, so most of my non-IDM comes from female artists -- Cocteau Twins, Throwing Muses, Belly, Tanya Donelly, Kristin Hersh, Drugstore Cowboy, Nut, Luscious Jackson, Scheer, Hopper, Frente, etc. As far as male bands go, there's Blur, Pavement, Radiohead, Delakota, Idlewild, Regular Fries, etc. -- Mark Stevens http://www.sonance.demon.co.uk/

Being ancient (42 with an impending birthday), I can tell you that I've experienced similar paradigm shifts many many times. My *big* sister was 14 years older and I had a brother 7 years older than me so I fell asleep nestled in the niche of our old player (where the bass came from :-) and I knew the records by the colors and amount of wear on the labels long before I could read. From Fats Domino to Doo Wop/Chuck Berry to Surf/Brits/Motown/Hendrix/Metal/Dance/Alternative/Goth/House/Techno - all required a different way of viewing "songs". What I find as a thread is the *creative spark* which can make an artist or a piece of music rise above its genre and grab you even if it isn't your cuppa. I love Patsy Cline, for example. James Brown. Scott (Engels) Walker. The thing about much of the current electronic (or at least, the past , say, 9 years) outpust is that it seems to require a much more radical shift than the previous "breaks from tradition". It seems often to focus much more on repetition than variance and therefore forces you either to pay closer attention (and become more sesnsitized to the subtleties of it) and/or "go under" its spell and lay out a heavier atmosphere than some of the more "conventional" styles. One of the strange stumbling blocks for me is the presence of lyrics. I find now that rarely can I get excited about them unless they are quite good (e.g., Costello) or there is a particular artist whom I like a lot anyway (Bowie, Pet Shoppers, Underworld [hiss all you want - I don't care and I'm old] ). Having said all of that, I can still pull out an old Associates lp, spin some old Ultravox or Jimmy Ruffin and need to accelerate if I'm in my car. Gil Yaker wrote:

quoted 3 lines Just curious here...

> Just curious here... > > For those of you who listen almost exclusively to techno / idm / etc...--

jeff "10,000 people all screaming the same thing at the same time are wrong, even if they're right." dancing/about/architecture "...with wandering steps and slow..." ICQ904008

quoted 1 line For those of you who listen almost exclusively

> For those of you who listen almost exclusively

to techno / idm / etc... do you

quoted 1 line find you have a hard time listening to more

> find you have a hard time listening to more

conventional pop music and that

quoted 1 line techno that strays from a purist model (like

> techno that strays from a purist model (like

all the progressive crap) is

quoted 1 line difficult to listen to?

> difficult to listen to?

After I have been listening to IDM, etc etc etc. For me, Its a fresh change of pace to pop in something thats more conventional. Not only do I like IDM... I listen to Beck, Beastie Boys, Wu-Tang, Method Man, Combustable Edison, Limp Bizkit, a good part of music coming from the 70's and a few 80's tunes like Gary Numan. So, I'm not lock in IDM mode all the time. I myself can't distinguish between say trance and "progressive" trance and other models of that sort. I'm not a trance person but I do wonder fires up all these ravers and glitch kids. === J._/Mc @ Designst?rung Designstorung: http://members.xoom.com/jm45675/HTMLremix.html Underscore: http://www.gl.umbc.edu/~nworth1 _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

Interesting Point Gil! Its funny that U ask this, becuz my friend just asked me that yesturday-----. Lyrics, as others and yourself have implied, can either help or hurt a song.......heres the thing........... We were driving along listening to this tape that I just made for him(then playing was Primative Painter's "Invisible Landscapes"....) We were both quiet when I blurted out, all one can think of is positive thoughts with music of this nature-------he agrees and asked do I still listen to Rapp--------my look said it all but.........I responded, its too much negativity lyrics in most rapp.... The point, lyrics many times can be distracting, because one must focus and decipher the meaning---and this takes attention---but typically with Ambient or IDM, and Techno-----(INSTRUMENTAL) the mind can drift down which ever river it chooses, and its energy, in this case attention, does not have to be cannalized.....I am not the best with words but----it can have a positive and negative effect on an individul, and the same for the song, per se.............. Mr. Fingers, Intro...........has lyrics---but they're, for the most part, positive! np: Bola---"Wholbo" Hk!

quoted 47 lines -----Original Message-----

> -----Original Message----- > From: Gil Yaker [SMTP:gyaker@yahoo.com] > Sent: Saturday, June 26, 1999 3:05 PM > To: idm@hyperreal.org > Subject: (idm) listening to music... > > Just curious here... > > For those of you who listen almost exclusively to techno / idm / > etc... do you > find you have a hard time listening to more conventional pop music and > that > techno that strays from a purist model (like all the progressive crap) > is > difficult to listen to? > > I ask this b/c I find myself in an odd situation sometimes. Like the > other > night, went out to an Elvis Costello concert, and it was great - pure > pop > music, but the approach to listening to it is SO different from > listening to > IDM it's shocking. > > With IDM (and techno, generic) I find myself listen for changes, for > motion in > the song, for progression and for contrast. But if you apply these > criterium(?) > to pop music, you get screwed and the music often seems empty. > > I get dinged by my friends when there's a pop song on the radio that I > like. > Usually because of the full distored guitar sounds, the mix, or > whatever. I > tell them i like a song and they say, yeah but the lyrics suck..."oh, > i never > really bothered to pay attention to what they were saying, i'm just > listening > to how it sounds..." > > comments? > > -Gil > np: derrick may/innovator > _________________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

In a message dated 6/26/99 2:33:08 PM Mountain Daylight Time, xor@utdallas.edu writes:

quoted 5 lines I can relate, a great deal, to what you're saying. I find myself into

> I can relate, a great deal, to what you're saying. I find myself into > music for the music only. Sure if the lyrics to some song are great or > something, I won't fail to mention it or discredit it or whatever. But > for the most part, they could be giving me step-by-step instructions on > how to win the Publishers' Clearing House Sweepstakes for all I care...

I find it assinine to clump music and lyrics together into one catagory and even worse, to call the entire catagory music. Music is music, lyrics are words.. two EXTREMELY different forms of communication. Music convey's emotions, words convey definitions in the listeners mind.. Verbal communication is a flawed form of commication, and music is not. My favorite is when people refuse to listen to music that does not have words, I love those people and would like to give them flowers. -=Aaron

quoted 7 lines In a message dated 6/26/99 2:33:08 PM Mountain Daylight Time,

> In a message dated 6/26/99 2:33:08 PM Mountain Daylight Time, > xor@utdallas.edu writes: > > I find it assinine to clump music and lyrics together into one catagory and > even worse, to call the entire catagory music. Music is music, lyrics are > words.. two EXTREMELY different forms of communication. Music convey's > emotions, words convey definitions in the listeners mind..

I've let this thread go by for a while, perhaps to my credit I dunno, but I feel like I have to respond here. The category of "pure" music, meaning instrumental music, is a myth. Both lyrical and instrumental music express emotion, and both convey meaning. Lyrics are not merely bad poetry set to music, each constituent being independent. Even nonverbal music sets loose or creates associations which have relevance outside of the individual song, and outside of music as a whole, whether it be something as banal(but hot damn entertaining) as spy movies of the 1960's or something as highflown as whatever romantic pretensions you might have for yourself. When words are added, the meaning and emotion elicited often become more fixed, since words are analyzable into other words and hence definitions, but the overall meaning is also made more complex. Those who, unfortunately, can't appreciate instrumental music have merely channeled off a possible source of meaning. The human voice is an easy thing to latch onto, and is the most common conveyer of emotion as far as our experience goes (unless you happen to be a reclusive tech junkie who interacts only with BleepBloop or relateds). Lyrics, by the same token, can't be separated out from "musical aspects"-- most good lyrics make terrible poems, and most good poems make wretched lyrics. One of the better lyricists in our time was Chuck Berry, and I can promise he won't get anthologized in City Lights. I'll add in Modest Mouse for the hell of it, especially because of the aural fixations evident on the first album. Generally, I'd like to say that adding lyrics expands the possibilities for music, though it obviously isn't always a good thing-- finding a good singer is much more difficult than finding a good electronic artist or a good guitar player, as vocals are much more difficult to innovate without appearing contrived. Finding a new way to speak is a helluva lot harder than finding a new way to play-- playing doesn't have to appear natural. Plus, (ohh ohh IDM content) adding song to compositions that are aurally "busy", such as most IDM, is an extremely touchy proposition which usually tends toward mantra-like floating (MBV, Bjork remixes), speaksing (Tricky, Cap'n Beefheart), vocal drumming (some jazz), or calculated weirdness (Thinking Fellers Union). Or just plain yelling (most metal). Just some thoughts, hopefully close enough to topic, when obviously not on, not to piss everybody off. M. Verbal

quoted 6 lines communication is a flawed form of commication, and music is not. My favorite

> communication is a flawed form of commication, and music is not. My favorite > is when people refuse to listen to music that does not have words, I love > those people and would like to give them flowers. > > -=Aaron >

I'd like them to remove their heads from betwixt their buttocks. In a message dated 6/26/99 2:33:08 PM Mountain Daylight Time, xor@utdallas.edu writes:

quoted 5 lines I can relate, a great deal, to what you're saying. I find myself into

> I can relate, a great deal, to what you're saying. I find myself into > music for the music only. Sure if the lyrics to some song are great or > something, I won't fail to mention it or discredit it or whatever. But > for the most part, they could be giving me step-by-step instructions on > how to win the Publishers' Clearing House Sweepstakes for all I care...

I find it assinine to clump music and lyrics together into one catagory and even worse, to call the entire catagory music. Music is music, lyrics are words.. two EXTREMELY different forms of communication. Music convey's emotions, words convey definitions in the listeners mind.. Verbal communication is a flawed form of commication, and music is not. My favorite is when people refuse to listen to music that does not have words, I love those people and would like to give them flowers. -=Aaron

quoted 1 line Verbal communication is a flawed form of commication, and music is not.

> Verbal communication is a flawed form of commication, and music is not.

i find verbal communication easier to understand, personally. <overheard near a pool> "look at this guy, he seems to be drowning!!!" "no way, if he were, he'd be crying for help rather than humming the gilligan tune, don't you think? stop being so silly." "well, you gotta admit i guess he has to be pretty skilled for doing so even after 5 minutes underwater." "i don't understand you, paul." "la la la la la mmmmmmm mmm la la la la" "ohh, that, hrm, yeah, i bet he does, eh." -- david turgeon at http://www.notype.com

This entire sarcastic speal is completely unjustified. Let me explain it to you in black and white oh not-getting-it one. Communication does not necessaraly have to be the transfer of language/ words. When you hear a word it produces an idea in your head... you hear the word "Tree" and if you speak enlglish.. you understand.. you get a mental picture of a tree in your head.. when you hear the sound tree your brain remembers it, the file name is the sound "tree" and the data located there is an idea.. However, words can easily be interpreted differently by different people. The data or "idea" located at that file name "the sound" can be different for each person based on their life experiences with said idea. Therefore language is a flawed form of communication, since different people can have different impressions of words, the very same sentance can have different meanings to different people. What if that man drowning didn't speak any language known to you? How would he commicate to you he needed help? The only way you would know he was in distress would be the tone of his voice? Hence inflection/tone of voice can be seen to be a higher form of communication than language.. afterall.. if he made really distressing sounds.. you'd know he was in some form of trouble, no matter what language you were spoke. Same with music,.. music.. sound alone.. can say an endless amount more than words ever could. Music is by far a more pure form of language than spoken word could ever hope to be. Does that mean when you're drowning you should start whistling the Pop Eye the Sailor Man? Yes oh intelligent ass-ed one.

quoted 18 lines i find verbal communication easier to understand, personally.

> i find verbal communication easier to understand, personally. > > <overheard near a pool> > > "look at this guy, he seems to be drowning!!!" > > "no way, if he were, he'd be crying for help rather than humming the > gilligan tune, don't you think? stop being so silly." > > "well, you gotta admit i guess he has to be pretty skilled for doing so > even after 5 minutes underwater." > > "i don't understand you, paul." > > "la la la la la mmmmmmm mmm la la la la" > > "ohh, that, hrm, yeah, i bet he does, eh." >

On Mon, 28 Jun 1999 Crtrdge003@aol.com wrote:

quoted 5 lines The data or "idea" located at that file name "the sound" can be differ

> The data or "idea" located at that file name "the sound" can be different for > each person based on their life experiences with said idea. Therefore > language is a flawed form of communication, since different people can have > different impressions of words, the very same sentance can have different > meanings to different people.

and sound containing no words, put to music, can be interpreted infinitely more ways...and far more ambiguously, than any set of words. in the case of lyricless music the interpretation definitely is dependant on the ear and mind of the listener. i personally like music with lyrics..and without lyrics. they both have their place. cya. pants.

Did you ever see that drawing Lacan did spoofing the "arbre" / (image of tree) diagram in Saussure's _Course on General Linguistics_ where it's "hommes femmes" / (image of two doors)? I laughed so hard I wet my pants. No I didn't. np: Scritti Politti - I'm in Love with Jacques Derrida ( http://www.hydra.umn.edu/scritti.au )

quoted 68 lines -----Original Message-----

> -----Original Message----- > From: idm-owner@hyperreal.org [mailto:idm-owner@hyperreal.org]On Behalf > Of Crtrdge003@aol.com > Sent: Monday, June 28, 1999 3:48 PM > To: eerie@mnemonic.net; idm@hyperreal.org > Subject: Re: (idm) listening to music... > > > This entire sarcastic speal is completely unjustified. > > Let me explain it to you in black and white oh not-getting-it one. > > Communication does not necessaraly have to be the transfer of > language/ words. > > When you hear a word it produces an idea in your head... you hear > the word > "Tree" and if you speak enlglish.. you understand.. you get a > mental picture > of a tree in your head.. when you hear the sound tree your brain > remembers > it, the file name is the sound "tree" and the data located there > is an idea.. > However, words can easily be interpreted differently by > different people. > The data or "idea" located at that file name "the sound" can be > different for > each person based on their life experiences with said idea. Therefore > language is a flawed form of communication, since different > people can have > different impressions of words, the very same sentance can have different > meanings to different people. > What if that man drowning didn't speak any language known to you? > How would > he commicate to you he needed help? The only way you would know he was in > distress would be the tone of his voice? Hence inflection/tone of > voice can > be seen to be a higher form of communication than language.. > afterall.. if he > made really distressing sounds.. you'd know he was in some form > of trouble, > no matter what language you were spoke. Same with music,.. music.. sound > alone.. can say an endless amount more than words ever could. > Music is by far > a more pure form of language than spoken word could ever hope to be. Does > that mean when you're drowning you should start whistling the Pop Eye the > Sailor Man? Yes oh intelligent ass-ed one. > > > i find verbal communication easier to understand, personally. > > > > <overheard near a pool> > > > > "look at this guy, he seems to be drowning!!!" > > > > "no way, if he were, he'd be crying for help rather than humming the > > gilligan tune, don't you think? stop being so silly." > > > > "well, you gotta admit i guess he has to be pretty skilled for doing so > > even after 5 minutes underwater." > > > > "i don't understand you, paul." > > > > "la la la la la mmmmmmm mmm la la la la" > > > > "ohh, that, hrm, yeah, i bet he does, eh." > > > >

In a message dated 6/28/99 1:45:56 PM Mountain Daylight Time, mkorfha@linfield.edu writes:

quoted 3 lines Both lyrical and instrumental music

> Both lyrical and instrumental music > express emotion, and both convey meaning. Lyrics are not merely bad > poetry set to music, each constituent being independent.

read my last post on why language is flawed

In a message dated 6/28/99 1:45:56 PM Mountain Daylight Time, mkorfha@linfield.edu writes:

quoted 3 lines The category of "pure" music, meaning

> The category of "pure" music, meaning > instrumental music, is a myth. Both lyrical and instrumental music > express emotion, and both convey meaning.

I do concede however that words can contain much emotion, it's simply a fact that the same words will not produce the same emotion in different people, therefore language is an extremely flawed form of commication in comparison to music.. or simply just raw sound, for that matter. -=Aaron

Depends on if U are open minded enough to say everyone makes mistakes and read behind the mistake H-2-tha Muthafuckn k!

quoted 7 lines -----Original Message-----

> -----Original Message----- > From: webster [SMTP:LANGHAM@tessco.com] > Sent: Monday, June 28, 1999 4:07 PM > To: idm@hyperreal.org > Subject: (idm) listening to music... > > Is it just me, or is "commicate" not a word?

quoted 6 lines However, words can easily be interpreted differently by different people.

> However, words can easily be interpreted differently by different people. > The data or "idea" located at that file name "the sound" can be different for > each person based on their life experiences with said idea. Therefore > language is a flawed form of communication, since different people can have > different impressions of words, the very same sentance can have different > meanings to different people.

... therefore music is a flawed form of communication, since different people can have different impressions of sounds, the very same sound-pattern can have different meanings to different people...? let's take an example within the field of purely instrumental music: japanese harsh noise. play an aube track to your grand ma. then play it to me. witness the difference. now play a squarepusher song circa "rotted" to me. then listen to it yourself. get a pattern there?

quoted 10 lines What if that man drowning didn't speak any language known to you? How would

> What if that man drowning didn't speak any language known to you? How would > he commicate to you he needed help? The only way you would know he was in > distress would be the tone of his voice? Hence inflection/tone of voice can > be seen to be a higher form of communication than language.. afterall.. if he > made really distressing sounds.. you'd know he was in some form of trouble, > no matter what language you were spoke. Same with music,.. music.. sound > alone.. can say an endless amount more than words ever could. Music is by far > a more pure form of language than spoken word could ever hope to be. Does > that mean when you're drowning you should start whistling the Pop Eye the > Sailor Man? Yes oh intelligent ass-ed one.

my point was simply that to put musical communication as oh so godly & oh so divine & oh so perfect & in the same breath dismissing written/spoken word as "flawed" is a bit of a short-circuited thinking. one could maintain that music (let's assume that any noise can fit that category) is basic & word is a sophistication of it, hence being a "higher" form of communication. or one could say, as you do, that music being more universal & requiring less conventions (i.e. rules, grammar) to be understood makes it the "higher" one. it's actually such a trivial issue, we might as well go on with "does god exist?" while we're at it. as for my unwarranted sarcastic spiel, well, it was only meant to be funny (whether it achieved that goal or not is an open question). if you felt attacked by it, i'm sorry, as always. perhaps i should make all my messages bland & dull, it seems like humour is always detrimental to someone no matter what you do. then again, most people seem to take it well enough -- & perhaps return the humour back rather than flames. -- david turgeon at http://www.notype.com

Is it just me, or is "commicate" not a word?

quoted 1 line The data or "idea" located at that file name "the sound" can be differ

> The data or "idea" located at that file name "the sound" can be different

for <snip> Alright, so this data walks into a bar, right? <jokecontentsnip> And then the file name says, "Hey! That's not my 'the sound!'" Nice nonsense. Alfred.

In a message dated 6/28/99 2:08:36 PM Mountain Daylight Time, unit@interport.net writes:

quoted 2 lines i personally like music with lyrics..and

> i personally like music with lyrics..and > without lyrics. they both have their place.

like I said.. neither is a superior art

*sigh* well I guess.. like I said before, I don't think either is *superior* to the other.. music with lyrics/not lyrics I mean... why did I even argue over this it was so stupid. I don't even remember how it got started.. oh wait.. I remember.. Have you ever gotten a strong emotional imprint from something? Like a point in your life,.. where the air happen to smell a certain way, when you lived at a old home.. do you remember? little things.. just flash images.. especially when they are significant to your life, everybody can conjure up images that will spark a feeling.. an emotion.. it's almost like a mix of an emotion and an idea.. It means something, yet at the same time, it sparks an emotion, like love, safety, facination, danger, anger, fear,... many more... and their all mixes.. and all as different as snowflakes.. we were arguing about whether music is a purer form of communication. Or commication even.. Yeah, you can use different words of different flavors.. contrast the meanings.. each word like a piece of that snowflake. BZZZZZZZZZ I'm wrong. .. lyrics, used with an artists touch, can be any as expressive as music. I guess I tend not to think much about the artsy side of lyrics.. I keep hearing the local radio station bullshit going and going through my head. I guess that would be the data that the word "lyrics" produces in my head. Instantly it conjors up the idea of po(o)p music. oh well.. I'm dumb, lol guess I better sign off the list.. afterall, it's not the dumb dance music list. Oh what's that? I think I hear scatman john in the background! -aaron

quoted 3 lines distress would be the tone of his voice? Hence inflection/tone of voice can

>distress would be the tone of his voice? Hence inflection/tone of voice can >be seen to be a higher form of communication than language.. afterall.. if he >made really distressing sounds.. you'd know he was in some form of trouble,

the art of noise is paranoid ;-) ___________________________________________________________________ LAMB|FEAR OF FOURS -- "...there is life outside 4/4 rhythms..."

quoted 7 lines Did you ever see that drawing Lacan did spoofing the "arbre" / (image of

> Did you ever see that drawing Lacan did spoofing the "arbre" / (image of > tree) diagram in Saussure's _Course on General Linguistics_ where it's > "hommes femmes" / (image of two doors)? I laughed so hard I wet my pants. > No I didn't. > > np: Scritti Politti - I'm in Love with Jacques Derrida > ( http://www.hydra.umn.edu/scritti.au )

Damn. *I* posted that file to that server aaaages ago! Celebrating the return of the re-pressed (hardy har har), sr -- sd

quoted 2 lines I find it assinine to clump music and lyrics together into one catagory and

> I find it assinine to clump music and lyrics together into one catagory and > even worse, to call the entire catagory music.

"Singing is a trick to get people to listen to the music." - David Byrne sr -- sd