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

← archive index

Re: (idm) Introductions

2 messages · 2 participants · spans 1 day · search this subject
1996-12-09 21:01Matt Jarsky (idm) Introductions
└─ 1996-12-09 23:29TIMOTHY A EDWARDS Re: (idm) Introductions
expand allcollapse allclick any summary to toggle that message
1996-12-09 21:01Matt JarskyMy name is Matthew, but some of you may know me by my nom-de- keyboard "Magic Hands." I am
From:
Matt Jarsky
To:
Date:
Mon, 9 Dec 1996 17:01:29 -0400
Subject:
(idm) Introductions
permalink · <852563FB:007D2FB3.00@NRGNT1.GraphicNRG.com>
My name is Matthew, but some of you may know me by my nom-de- keyboard "Magic Hands." I am a young architect, just out of school. I am now in the process of having my sensibilities bludgeoned by work for a huge corporation, but that's another story. I've been on and off this list for about a year now and I've a few observations I'd like to make public. In general, the concept of IDM seems flawed. I know it is just a helpful handle, but intelligence is not readily quantifiable, not in people and not in music. When I listen to music, my head usually visualizes the accompanying "video," or, at the very least an image which complements the mood of a song. I have not noticed any correlation between the purported "intelligence" of the music to which I am listening and the quality of the imagery which appears in my mind's eye. If "intelligent" is meant only to imply that those involved in the production of IDM are more intelligent than their counterparts in Happy Hardcore...well I don't care how smart they are, so long as the music's cool. As I said before, its just a handle. We might just as well substitute "Quality," "Creative," "Interesting," or "Musicianly" for the "Intelligent" in IDM. None of these would make it any simpler to determine what qualifies as the kind of music we're interested in discussing on this list. My point is a fairly straightforward: only on the day we can definitively define intelligence will we be able to determine absolutely what belongs on this list. In the meantime, I think a lot of patience and tolerance are in order. (As an aside: why is it that music with a small DQ (dance quotient) is so much more acceptable for discussion on this list than music with a low IQ?) Music Content: Spooky: Found Sound--GREAT. Due to budgetary constraints, my music purchases are limited to 1 CD per month. (How do I do it? 2 words: baby coming.) I do, however, listen before I buy and I hang out with several other serious IDM fans, so my exposure to the scene is not as limited as one might first suspect. So it is with some measure of confidence that I recommend Spooky's latest full length offering as a sound investment for any IDM fan. The appeal of this record goes far beyond nifty "found" sounds. The sounds of banging metal which accompany many of the tracks are just the beginning. Indeed, I bought the album not so much because I enjoyed these noises, but because they sounded so different from so much of what is out there. (I bought 2 Lone Swordsmen for the same reason, but it has yet to grow on me in the same way.) They're still harsh to my ears, but the interplay between these sounds and the lusher ones which often form the melody flatters them both. Charles Moore, an American architect, is quoted as saying "Contrast supports meaning." Absolutely. The sweet bits sound all the moreso because of the clangy bits stirring things up. Listen to it ASAP. other faves: Orbital: In Sides Woob: 1 & 2 Higher Intelligence Agency: Freefloater Autechre: Amber, Tri Repetae all for now, magic hands
1996-12-09 23:29TIMOTHY A EDWARDSI wish I had my copy of Artificial Intelligence II with me. There is a nice explanation of
From:
TIMOTHY A EDWARDS
To:
Matt Jarsky
Cc:
Date:
Mon, 9 Dec 1996 15:29:41 -0800 (PST)
Subject:
Re: (idm) Introductions
Reply to:
(idm) Introductions
permalink · <Pine.A32.3.94.961209152140.89208B-100000@ebi.library.ucla.edu>
I wish I had my copy of Artificial Intelligence II with me. There is a nice explanation of "intelligent" direct from the Warp folk. They refer to technology, not the intellect of the music or it's listeners. Anyone care to post the short section in the liner notes? --t On Mon, 9 Dec 1996, Matt Jarsky wrote:
quoted 63 lines In general, the concept of IDM seems flawed. I know it is just a> In general, the concept of IDM seems flawed. I know it is just a > helpful handle, but intelligence is not readily quantifiable, not > in people and not in music. When I listen to music, my head usually > visualizes the accompanying "video," or, at the very least an image > which complements the mood of a song. I have not noticed any > correlation between the purported "intelligence" of the music to > which I am listening and the quality of the imagery which appears > in my mind's eye. > If "intelligent" is meant only to imply that those involved in > the production of IDM are more intelligent than their counterparts > in Happy Hardcore...well I don't care how smart they are, so long > as the music's cool. > As I said before, its just a handle. We might just as well > substitute "Quality," "Creative," "Interesting," or "Musicianly" > for the "Intelligent" in IDM. None of these would make it any > simpler to determine what qualifies as the kind of music we're > interested in discussing on this list. My point is a fairly > straightforward: only on the day we can definitively define > intelligence will we be able to determine absolutely what belongs > on this list. In the meantime, I think a lot of patience and > tolerance are in order. > (As an aside: why is it that music with a small DQ (dance > quotient) is so much more acceptable for discussion on this list > than music with a low IQ?) > > Music Content: > > Spooky: Found Sound--GREAT. > > Due to budgetary constraints, my music purchases are limited to > 1 CD per month. (How do I do it? 2 words: baby coming.) I do, > however, listen before I buy and I hang out with several other > serious IDM fans, so my exposure to the scene is not as limited as > one might first suspect. So it is with some measure of confidence > that I recommend Spooky's latest full length offering as a sound > investment for any IDM fan. > The appeal of this record goes far beyond nifty "found" sounds. > The sounds of banging metal which accompany many of the tracks are > just the beginning. Indeed, I bought the album not so much because > I enjoyed these noises, but because they sounded so different from > so much of what is out there. (I bought 2 Lone Swordsmen for the > same reason, but it has yet to grow on me in the same way.) They're > still harsh to my ears, but the interplay between these sounds and > the lusher ones which often form the melody flatters them both. > Charles Moore, an American architect, is quoted as saying "Contrast > supports meaning." Absolutely. The sweet bits sound all the moreso > because of the clangy bits stirring things up. > Listen to it ASAP. > > other faves: > > Orbital: In Sides > Woob: 1 & 2 > Higher Intelligence Agency: Freefloater > Autechre: Amber, Tri Repetae > > > all for now, > > magic hands > > >