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

← archive index

(idm) Re : Orbital ( the BOX )

2 messages · 2 participants · spans 3 days · search this subject
1996-04-19 20:54(idm) Re : Orbital ( the BOX )
1996-04-22 16:48Renee Baker (idm) Re : Orbital ( the BOX )
expand allcollapse allclick any summary to toggle that message
1996-04-19 20:54PaulT23@aol.comMy .02 cents on the recent Orbital discussion(s) - two days late as usual. I also disagree
From:
To:
Date:
Fri, 19 Apr 1996 16:54:45 -0400
Subject:
(idm) Re : Orbital ( the BOX )
permalink · <960419165444_194391525@emout08.mail.aol.com>
My .02 cents on the recent Orbital discussion(s) - two days late as usual. I also disagree with Fresh. Unlike the first respondant, I have indeed heard & bought the record. I like the first three tracks pretty well. I think people should just listen to the music and decide if they like it or not without needing to compare it to something that the same artist has done before. There are enough censoring/limiting factors in the music industry without a groups fans demanding that alternative/electronic artists continue to sound the same. If a band tries something new, they are probably not going to be brilliant at it immediately. A little patience perhaps. I am not saying that we shouldn't have and announce our favourite records, just that we shouldn't force a band to compete against its past or be chained to it. For the record, I don't have a favorite Orbital or Orb record ( but I listen to and adore "Orbvs Terrarvm" a lot ). I don't think Orbital is influential on Jungle ( certainly the opposite is true ). But what about "Radio Babylon" by MBM? That is a much older example of a Reggae bassline completely invading a techno soundscape in a very successful manner ( even FSOL couldn't resist it - not that I know what they can resist ). - PaulT23 On Now : Loop Guru "catalog of desires vol 3 - the clear white verion" - really good - the only loop guru I have compelety dug.
1996-04-22 16:48Renee BakerI bought my copy on Saturday so that I could join in the discussion. Personally, I LOVE tr
From:
Renee Baker
To:
Date:
22 Apr 1996 09:48:02 -0700
Subject:
(idm) Re : Orbital ( the BOX )
permalink · <07370317BB842027*/c=us/admd=telemail/prmd=nasa/o=jpl/ou=ccmail/s=Baker/g=Nanette/i=R/@MHS>
I bought my copy on Saturday so that I could join in the discussion. Personally, I LOVE track #2. I think I'm going to record the floor boards in the kitchen and my bedroom immediately. I've got tons of sound potential right under my feet! I love the tinny sound of the piano and the harpsicord is dead on right for the lettering of the single. My only question is this: What's the significance of the painting on the cover? It seems out of place. Comments? Renee renee.baker@jpl.nasa.gov _______________________________________________________________________________ Subject: (idm) Re : Orbital ( the BOX ) From: PaulT23@aol.com at Internet Date: 19-04-1996 13:59 My .02 cents on the recent Orbital discussion(s) - two days late as usual. I also disagree with Fresh. Unlike the first respondant, I have indeed heard & bought the record. I like the first three tracks pretty well. I think people should just listen to the music and decide if they like it or not without needing to compare it to something that the same artist has done before. There are enough censoring/limiting factors in the music industry without a groups fans demanding that alternative/electronic artists continue to sound the same. If a band tries something new, they are probably not going to be brilliant at it immediately. A little patience perhaps.