IDM Mailing Archive

2000-07-17 16:01isophluxSome horizons are bigger then others, so why limit them with genre walls? Maybe this goes

From:: isophlux <isophlux@isophlux.com>
To:: <idm@hyperreal.org>
Date:: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 12:01:08 -0400
Subject:: [idm] RE: prolificism as related to popularity

Some horizons are bigger then others, so why limit them with genre walls? Maybe this goes for Lex.(Alex Graham), AFX and many more. Life would be boring if everyone stood still, and this goes for artistic expressions too. IDM's threshold for good music has grown weak and sad. It's sad when recording a fart and then making it glitch like some bad CD and adding some bell sounds is titled as "Cutting Edge" and then having 20,000 so called pioneers releasing the same shit. That's not called cutting edge it's called Normal!!! It feels like MOST of what gets released now feels lifeless with no direction, no message, and no travel. Most so called artist should ask themselves why do I make the music I do????? Not that anyone needs to know, but with all the "sounds like"and "looks like" going on it makes us think. Soon the AFXs and Warps of the world will just sell license patents on styles to the masses of so called artist, just like inventors do with their inventions. That would be funny, selling styles like light bulbs. But I guess when there is a demand for the emperor's new clothes there is going to be suppliers. Oh!! and about this statement!!! (my point is, if you're good and capable, it takes time to make truly excellent music. so being prolific at the start to help make yourself popular goes dead against trying to make excellent music. and if you take the time and make excellent music, but wait until you have enough to release at once such that it appears you're being prolific, most of the stuff you've spent all this time working on will now be 'old' and people won't think it's as great as it would have seemed had you released it when you first made it.) Wow!!!! A: Some one could work on a math problem all day and still get it wrong. Some people can take a second on it and get it right. So time does not matter. B. This is not Pop music. Isophlux "You will never see the light, hiding under a warped shadow." --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

2000-07-17 18:04Adam PiontekOn Mon, 17 Jul 2000 12:01:08 -0400, isophlux wrote: >Most so called artist should ask them

From:: Adam Piontek <damek@earthling.net>
To:: idm-list <idm@hyperreal.org>
Date:: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 13:04:23 -0500
Subject:: Re: [idm] RE: prolificism as related to popularity
Reply to:: [idm] RE: prolificism as related to popularity

On Mon, 17 Jul 2000 12:01:08 -0400, isophlux wrote:

quoted 3 lines Most so called artist should ask themselves why do I make the music I do????? Not that any

>Most so called artist should ask themselves why do I make the music I do????? Not that anyone needs to >know, but with all the "sounds like"and "looks like" going on it makes us think. Soon the AFXs and Warps >of the world will just sell license patents on styles to the masses of so called artist, just like

I was crying this tune a month or so ago. Then I learned to be really picky about what I buy. There's still good stuff being produced. And I'm not suggesting it's objective, I'm not suggesting that there's some particular set of music that is good. I am suggesting that if you learn what *you* *really* like, and teach yourself to ignore the stuff that you don't like, you'll be happier. I'm still teaching myself.

quoted 9 lines Oh!! and about this statement!!!

>Oh!! and about this statement!!! > >(my point is, if you're good and capable, it takes time to make truly >excellent music.) > >Wow!!!! > >A: Some one could work on a math problem all day and still get it wrong. Some people can take a second >on it and get it right. So time does not matter.

Well, theoretically, yes, the labor theory of value as proposed by Marx is completely wrong and time does not matter when judging the value of labor, especially creative labor. However, I wasn't talking about the amount of time different artists take to create, I was trying to say that for any one artist, the longer they spend on a piece, the better tha piece will be. Of course, there's an upper limit here at which this fails; you can spend *too much* time on a piece. However, in general, I stand by the idea that the it takes longer for any given artist to make a track better than it would be if he spent less time on it.

quoted 1 line B. This is not Pop music.

>B. This is not Pop music.

Everything is Pop music. Some is just more Pop than others. Anti-Pop eats itself. It occurs to me also that anti-elitism quickly becomes yet another form of elitism. One can never escape.

quoted 1 line Isophlux

>Isophlux

this web site does not work for me (www.isophlux.com) ... i've tried many times but the flash (is it flash?) never ever loads. -- Adam Piontek [http://www.tcinternet.net/users/damek/] ICQ: 3456339 [damek@earthling.net] ... Dinner not ready....(A)bort, (R)etry, (P)izza. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

[idm] RE: prolificism as related to popularity