Pigface definition of "chill out" needs updating...
D13
I enjoyed listening to Mark's vox on Stanley Pain, it's a different,
uncommonly harsh kind of voice. As far as P-Orridge goes i think all the
spoken word stuff on Stanley Pain and Furnace is pretty cool. Mind you, i
don't know enough about Genesis to form a strong opinion on him....
--
"I think that you'll find a little S & M nessasary to trigger off
a good fifthly series of hallucination's."-Videodrome
Arklark23
the dvoa cs not breathing cd is great......we also have a new phylr disc
out, as well as a new lab report....all are worth checking out!!!!
love
ark
Natira Hammerstrom
Skarekroe <skar...@aol.com> wrote:
>did you notice the reason atkins didn't advertise the amazing line-up on
>this release? there wasn't on! oh it's a good album, but i guess i've
>come to expect more impressive musicians on a pigface album than jim
>marcus, marc heal, and the singer from chainsuck.
This was very pointed, actually. Martin wanted people to appreciate the
album as a sum of its parts, not just as a massive name-drop.
And I'm a big fan of the Jim Marcus and Marc Heal sounds myself.
"Impressive" musicians aren't always just the biggest names that people
recognize from their Skinny Puppy albums. Hell, if it hadn't been for
Pigface, I'd have never heard of the likes of Meg Lee Chin or Mary Byker
or a few dozen other talented musicians whose own stuff is a little more
obscure.
-- gnat!
Chris H. Chatham
Pepperdyne said:
>
>Anti-Orridge button? Where do I sign up?
>
>(because let's face it, Eyes of Stanley Pain's vocals, both Sbybey's and
>Genesis' were very very annoying.)
Though I too fumble for an Anti-Orridge button, I _loved_ the vocals
on Eyes of Stanley Pain! I consider Spybey's vocals THE prime example of the
power vocalless industrial lacks. Perhaps I speak only of the first track on
TEOSP, but his voice worked so perfectly with the music... I guess it comes
down to a simple difference of opinion here. I just had to speak up for the
pro-vocal faction - I'm sick of all these vocalless bands.
Spinefolder, of course, is different. But listen to the new THD
track on the Culture Shock cd - that's prefectly done. And I loved the
whispering style haujobb used on SFASP. Even the intelligent trance of
Covenant couldn't be so esteemed were it not for the vocals. Besides, who
can pass up a line like "a beacon for liars in the dark"?
I'd love to hear the so-called intelligent techno groups try to add
vocals. I'm sure that would reveal EXACTLY how powerful the intellects
behind IDM are... .
________________________________cHRIscHATHAm_______________________________
+ bread for a swan, in the lake of fire +
art-music-lit-thought - http://www.smart.net/~chatham/chris/
___t__o__o___p__r__e__c__i__s__e__l__y___i__n___h__i__s___i__m__a__g__e__?__
Custom Programming&Design|http://www.cgishop.com|Dream it, and we'll code it!
VSVN ARAB
cha...@smart.net (Chris H. Chatham) wrote:
> I'd love to hear the so-called intelligent techno groups try to add
>vocals. I'm sure that would reveal EXACTLY how powerful the intellects
>behind IDM are... .
Considering the lyrics most electro-industrial groups write are
totally absurd, pretentious, and calculated to sound oh-so-scarey, I'm
sure it wouldn't be hard for most idm artists to come up with
something better.
If some electro-industrial fans actually sat down and listened to some
of the better IDM artists for a few minutes, it would become obvious
for even some of the most musically regressed and small-minded of
industrial fans that IDM artists reveal how "powerful" their
intellects are in their abilities to shape and manipulate sound in
infinitely more interesting ways than most any electro-industrial
group (a couple of exceptions - haujobb, lassigue bendthaus). And they
integrate these unique sounds and textures into song structures which
are much more interesting and musically satisfying than what you hear
coming from electro-industrial artists because most electro-industrial
groups write their music in the structure of pop music - verse,
chorus, etc...
Most electro-industrial groups have to rely on these easy pop hooks
and use their kindergarten rhythms in order to lure in the listener
because they really have nothing new to say musically.
And this is exactly why groups like Autechre, Panasonic, and Techno
Animal are a lot closer to the true spirit of industrial music than
99% of the groups working the genre of electro-industrial, a genre
full of musicians who ran out of fresh ideas at years ago. Of course
there are a few exceptions, but I always find it amusing that when a
band like Haujobb comes along and tries to breathe new life into it,
everyone calls them a sellout - when they're actually closer to the
true spirit of what industrial was about. As if they're not being true
to electro-industrial by using their equipment to it's full capacity
and learning how to further manipulate their sounds like the idm
groups are doing.
How come it is that fans of electro-industrial, a genre of music where
both the musicians and fans seem to be obsessed with advances in
technology and how these advances are shaping our world, would rather
have their music reflect the technology and music of 10 years ago,
rather than that of today?
VSVN ARAB
Chris H. Chatham
VSVN ARAB said:
>[...] IDM artists reveal how "powerful" their
>intellects are in their abilities to shape and manipulate sound in
>infinitely more interesting ways than most any electro-industrial
>group (a couple of exceptions - haujobb, lassigue bendthaus).
Some people claim that synthetic music is nothing more than pushing a
button. While I don't agree with that sentiment, its intention _is_
legitimate: it is the most simple forms of expression (free of gimmicks, if
you will) which allow the most precise depiction of one's intelligence
through what one expresses.
Without the "shapers and manipulaters" the intelligence of the
artists behind Intelligent Dance Music might prove unjustifiably arrogant.
>[IDM] song structures are much more interesting and musically satisfying
>than what you hear coming from electro-industrial artists because their
>music [is] in the structure of pop music - verse, chorus, etc...
It is generally more satisfying to succeed within certain boundaries
than it is to excel without those boundaries. How easy are sports when they
have no rules! Or maybe I just like rhyming poems better. ;)
The crux of your argument seems to be that this structure eliminates
the possibility for original music. Yet this structure is defined only by
repeating elements - a repeating chorus, a repeating verse. How far do you
suggest we destroy this structure? To the point of allowing only a single
beat in a single song? Ha!
The IDM fans enjoy the shaping and manipulating of this repetition to
the transcendence of a repeat. The Pop-structure fans enjoy the enhancement
and emphasis which every verse and chorus respectively apply in a similar
progression.
The pop structure does ruin lots of bands. So many times it doesn't
work - but for the few Eurythmics or Modern English or Depeche Mode or And
One or Yazoo or Soft Cell choruses that are still in your head, it's worth
it. The pop structure ruins bands because it's easy to do - there are
guidelines and checklists I agree! - but it's near impossible to perfect.
And what a triumph it is when perfect! "I'll stop the world and melt
with you..." Sing it again and you'll remember.
>And this is exactly why groups like Autechre, Panasonic, and Techno
>Animal are a lot closer to the true spirit of industrial music than
>99% of the groups working the genre of electro-industrial, a genre
>full of musicians who ran out of fresh ideas at years ago.[snip]
>How come it is that fans of electro-industrial [...who] would rather
>have their music reflect the technology and music of 10 years ago,
>rather than that of today?
Why do you expect the music of "industrial" groups today to satisfy
its forefathers' musical ethics of TWENTY years ago? It is you who cling to
the past - and a more distant one. With all this "intelligent" dance music
out there, perhaps it could actually say something other than "do like
daddy." Speak, IDM!
VSVN ARAB
cha...@smart.net (Chris H. Chatham) wrote:
>VSVN ARAB said:
>>[...] IDM artists reveal how "powerful" their
>>intellects are in their abilities to shape and manipulate sound in
>>infinitely more interesting ways than most any electro-industrial
>>group (a couple of exceptions - haujobb, lassigue bendthaus).
> Some people claim that synthetic music is nothing more than pushing a
>button. While I don't agree with that sentiment, its intention _is_
>legitimate: it is the most simple forms of expression (free of gimmicks, if
Actually, no, its intention is not legitimate if someone is using that
as a basis for judging the quality of a piece of music. It doesn't
matter how a song is made as long you're expressing yourself.
Gimmick is a loaded word - isn't everyone using a "gimmick" to express
themselves when they play any instrument? Aren't guitar players using
gimmicks when they play electric guitars and run them through effect
pedals?
All through history as new instruments were invented and as they
became more and more complex because of advances in technology, were
people beginning to rely more and more on gimmicks for their enjoyment
of music, or did it simply mean that music could be more enjoyable and
exciting because there was a wider sound pallette?
Of course the Catholic Church used to think that you were nothing more
than a backwards pagan if you made music with anything other than your
voice. 8]
So I don't think it's correct to say that because IDM artists are
using the lastest technology available to them to create their music
that they're relying on a gimmick. If anything, they should be
applauded for using it in the first place.
I think the problem that a lot of people have with electronic music is
that with so much at your disposal, it sometimes doesn't take quite as
much effort to create a *halfway* decent song.
But people should ask themselves, am I listening to this music because
I know this was really hard to make, or because it's enjoyable? If
people really want to listen to some music that's hard to make then
maybe they should just listen 70's and 80' prog rock where some
musicians put more emphasis on impressing people with their skills
than with making something which was a real artistic expression. But
on the other hand, the good thing about all of this, is that with so
much at your disposal, and with the relative ease that comes now with
making your own music, you need to work _harder_ to make something
which really stands out and communicates to people. And this is one
big reason I don't like most electro-industrial myself, it's because I
know what kinds of tools are at the disposal of electro-industrial
artists and the kinds of things they could really be doing with them.
And why is it with these tools at their disposal that they want to
keep falling back on these formulas when I know they could be doing
things that are infinitely more interesting?
Don't you ever get tired of hearing the same song over and over?
If you're going to compose electronic music then why constantly limit
yourself when now you've so many more possibilities?
When the year 3010 comes around they're passing around the newly
revised edition of Merriam-Webster's Music Appreciation to students, I
don't think Leatherstrip and :Wumpscut: will be there, however,
Autechre could be in it because they're doing things with their music
that will be remembered.
> it is the most simple forms of expression (free of gimmicks, if
>you will) which allow the most precise depiction of one's intelligence
>through what one expresses.
And who's to say what is exactly the most simple form of expression?
Some people might say music is, some people might say poetry is, some
people might say painting is, etc...
But I'll assume that you're referring to the most simple form of
expression within the realm of music. Now, if you're saying the most
simple form of expression through music is that which doesn't rely on
gimmicks and you're saying that idm artists rely on gimmicks, then I
think I've already shown that to be untrue...
But, if I do remember correctly what started this discussion in the
first place, you had made a comment about how IDM artists could prove
exactly how powerful their intellects are by writing lyrics for their
songs. And this is what confuses me, because if, as you said, the most
simple forms of expression allow the most precise depiction of one's
intelligence, then by using lyrics in a song you've already lost the
most simple form of expression - just the music itself. And by this
logic, IDM artists will almost always depict their intelligence more
precisely than electro-industrial artists. And not only will they have
depicted it more precisely, but because they generally understand
sound better and can shape and manipulate their sounds better - they
will have proven to everyone that their intellects are more powerful
than electro-industrial artists ;] ;] ;]
> Without the "shapers and manipulaters" the intelligence of the
>artists behind Intelligent Dance Music might prove unjustifiably arrogant.
I assume that by "shapers and manipulaters" that you mean the
technology by which they make their sounds and their music.
Are they arrogant because they want to use the technology the have at
their disposal to its fullest extent?
Most people who play instruments understand that knowing how to shape
and manipulate the sounds that come from your instrument are a big
factor in the overall composition of your music, and in the enjoyment
of the music which was composed. A good violin player knows how to
apply the right amount of "vibrato" at certain points in the music
they're playing and any other number of things which a violin player
does to shape their sound.
Are IDM artists arrogant because they have more ways to shape and
manipulate their sounds at their disposal?
>>[IDM] song structures are much more interesting and musically satisfying
>>than what you hear coming from electro-industrial artists because their
>>music [is] in the structure of pop music - verse, chorus, etc...
> It is generally more satisfying to succeed within certain boundaries
>than it is to excel without those boundaries. How easy are sports when they
Wrong! If you can actually make a piece of music that really affects
people and you've done that without falling back on the crutch of the
pop music structure, then you know you've really done something great.
And in the future I'd be a lot more likely to keep going back to that
song because it was more unique.
>have no rules! Or maybe I just like rhyming poems better. ;)
and what is the sound of one hand clapping???
what does sports have to do with music/art?
I take it that you don't like abstract art or appreciate surrealism
and dadaism? do you like your music/art to have as many rules as
possible so that you won't be afraid of getting lost?
But it is funny that you brought up sports, because that made me
remember a phrase I heard one time: Music isn't sports, there doesn't
have to be a winner. And this is how people always end up in these
discussions, because for some reason you felt compelled to pit one
grouping of artists against another. It's like a "group think"
mentality where people have to show their loyalty to a certain
brand/dictator/musical genre in order to show how cool they are to
other people by making deragotory remarks about another genre.
It might have sounded better if you said "what is a recipe without
directions?" (taking us back to the whole pop-structure/formula thing
;]
Actually, that made me think about some people I've talked to who
don't understand how anyone could like groups like autechre or
squarepusher because they've not "been given the directions" for how
to listen to their music. And this is exactly why I hate pop music. It
brainwashes you from birth and makes it so that you only enjoy music
when it's structured in that one specific way.
Some people say rules are made to be broken. And within the music/art
world they're usually broken for the better. And usually they are
broken by those people who are much too creative to be confined by the
rules. 90% of everyone else just copies the innovators and runs their
ideas into the ground.
It seems like I hear more often about the artists from the past who
broke the rules than I do about artists the past who just followed
along and did whatever everyone else was doing at the time.
> The crux of your argument seems to be that this structure eliminates
>the possibility for original music. Yet this structure is defined only by two
At the very least it greatly reduces the possibility.
>repeating elements - a repeating chorus, a repeating verse. How far do you
>suggest we destroy this structure? To the point of allowing only a single
I don't suggest that we destroy it.
I just don't like it's dark cloud always hanging over me, and for the
most part I don't like artists that have to constantly rely on it. I
don't mind a few songs here and there structured that way of course -
but it mostly bothers me.
I don't have to be spoon-fed my music. But I'll admit that it can be
nice _sometimes_ if you just want to in that mode.
>beat in a single song? Ha!
Allowing a single beat? If you only knew how ironic that was...
umm... the verse/chorus structure has nothing do with how many "beats"
can be in a song. Actually, if you destroyed that structure it would
make it a little easier to allow more different "beats" in your song.
Also, it's defined by more than the repeating elements of repeating
chorus, repeating verse... it's also defined by simple rhythms and
basic time signatures. IDM artists also use basic time signatures for
the most part, but they focus on their composition elsewhere - like
changing and mutating the sounds and by sometimes using more complex
rhythms... where as most electro-industrial songs are fairly static.
Once you hear the first 30 seconds of an electro-industrial song you
almost already know everything that is going to happen until the end
of the song.
> The IDM fans enjoy the shaping and manipulating of this repetition to
>the transcendence of a repeat. The Pop-structure fans enjoy the enhancement
>and emphasis which every verse and chorus respectively apply in a similar
>progression.
It's no longer an artistic "enhancement" or "emphasis" when it has
been done so much.
It may seem like an enhancement because a lot of people _need_ that
in order to like a song because this is what people have been
brainwashed to like all of their lives and so it triggers subconscious
reactions. Why do you think Muzak is so effective?
It's really just an artistic crutch most of the time.
> The pop structure does ruin lots of bands. So many times it doesn't
>work - but for the few Eurythmics or Modern English or Depeche Mode or And
>One or Yazoo or Soft Cell choruses that are still in your head, it's worth
>it. The pop structure ruins bands because it's easy to do - there are
But most of those bands and their choruses don't do much for me.
>guidelines and checklists I agree! - but it's near impossible to perfect.
eh?
> And what a triumph it is when perfect! "I'll stop the world and melt
>with you..." Sing it again and you'll remember.
Heheh, I'd rather not.
I would think that an even bigger triumph is when you can compose
something that really sticks with people without sticking to the
formula.
>>And this is exactly why groups like Autechre, Panasonic, and Techno
>>Animal are a lot closer to the true spirit of industrial music than
>>99% of the groups working the genre of electro-industrial, a genre
>>full of musicians who ran out of fresh ideas at years ago.[snip]
>>How come it is that fans of electro-industrial [...who] would rather
>>have their music reflect the technology and music of 10 years ago,
>>rather than that of today?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
you still didn't address this question.
Let me restate the original question again:
How come it is that fans of electro-industrial, a genre where both the
musicians and the fans seem to be obsessed about technology and how it
shapes our world, would rather have their music reflect the technology
and music of 10 years ago, rather than that of today?
> Why do you expect the music of "industrial" groups today to satisfy
>its forefathers' musical ethics of TWENTY years ago? It is you who cling to
I don't neccessarily expect them to, I just think it's too bad that
they don't. I think it's too bad that they've regressed so much that
they need to rely on artistic crutches to get their music across to
audiences who apparently need everything spoon-fed to them in
easy-to-swallow packages.
What's even funnier about all of this is you take a group like NIN, a
group that most electro-industrial fans around here seem to despise,
and then you take a critical look at their music on the last album and
then you take a critical look at the music on most electro-industrial
albums, and NIN seems to have a lot wider artistic range -
compositionally that is, definitely not lyrically. 8]
Of course I expect them to subscribe to at least a few of the ethics
of of their forefathers, and at the very least to subscribe to one of
the biggest priniciples of what industrial was about - breaking down
the tyranny of pop music. If they don't at least do that - then what's
even the point of having all of these groups under the heading of
industrial? Because I think industrial is more of a philosophy than it
is a certain type of music when you get down to the root of it.
>the past - and a more distant one. With all this "intelligent" dance music
I don't cling to the past, and certainly not a more distant one. I
would say that someone who likes their music based on traditions from
hundreds of years ago would more likely be the person who clings to
the past.
>out there, perhaps it could actually say something other than "do like
>daddy." Speak, IDM!
You totally contradict yourself here, once again. You said that a
piece of music is more satisfying if it sticks to the rules, yet you
think IDM does like daddy - wouldn't that make it more satisfying in
your book???
But the main problem with this statement is not that you've
contradicted yourself... it's just that it's completely incorrect. The
real problem with a lot of IDM artists is that many of them are
bandwagon jumpers - so your phrase should have been "be like brother"
;] But usually a bandwagon jumper is still more interesting to me
than hearing someone do a song in the same mode they've always done
music in - a music that's from another past trend no less. You have
your trends, and then once they become established they become genres.
And then usually about the time it takes for me and other Americans to
clue into it the genre is dead. ;]
Why does electro-industrial have to be so linear? Why not zig-zag
around and go in a few circles? Take a road less traveled, get lost
somewhere and have a little adventure ;]
Me, I'm not totally pro-IDM either. I don't even like the phrase
because most of the better IDM groups most people wouldn't want to
dance to anyway!
And there's a lot of other music I enjoy besides IDM.
Maybe you should take some advice from Grey - Digital Target. Doesn't
he say if you don't like it, just don't listen to it?
badass industrial cyborf
As if they're not being true
> to electro-industrial by using their equipment to it's full capacity
> and learning how to further manipulate their sounds like the idm
> groups are doing.
i agree.. yet _sound_ is not even the half of it. nor is chronology.
both industrial-electro and "intelligent"
techno suffer from what has been denounced as the "disposable
materialization" of electronic music, that is to say, the
innundation of advanced technology with the invention or
introduction of advanced (or even primitive) music theory. sound
alone can inspire attention, but without some concept of
music structure or complexity, the most technologically
complex or innovative composition fades into academic obscurity
or novelty.
it seems that most of today's electronic musicians |industrialists;
techno, ambient, trance.composers; djs; neo-classical electronics,
etc.| know every detail of the latest trend in virtual analog synthesis,
physical modeling, sampling, digital recording and editing (and
why not know about them? they ARE interesting, i mean, as an engineer,
and a musician.. technology is seductive)
but spending all of your time on one side of the fence only to neglect
the other. something is desperately missing from all modern forms of
electronic music. that something
is music.
not traditional a-b-a-b.bridge.a-b pop structure (god knows industrial
musicians beat this to death), not avant garde minimalism (someone else
knows that trance techno/ambient composers beat This to death)...
but real, explorative, innovative, advanced, simple, consonate and
dissonate musical structure.
god damnit why is the most beautiful, mesmarizing, and complex music
in the world still performed on 300 year old ACOUSTIC instruments??
where is the edge? where is the noise? where is the (post) modern
sound?
neo-classical music most be re-invented. and it must be invented
through the underground of electronic music.
badass industrial cyborf
structure is the whole point! IT IS IN ITS LACK OF STRUCTURE THAT IDM FAILS!
and it is in industrial's predictable structure that IT fails!
yes, i want something that isn't really industrial or techno.
perhaps this is the wrong forum to discuss.
but i grew up with industrial, only to be disillusioned with its lack
of growth. and then i re-examined classical and neo-classical music,
and found a wealth of structural brilliance only weakened by the
dry sounds of traditional orchestra. IT IS IN SOUND THAT NEO-CLASSICAL
FAILS.
i am trying, between school and life, to re-invent classical music in
the eyes of electronics. i don't know if i can do it...i am trying,
but my resources, my training..are limited. i wish someone else would!!
i want to hear beethoven's moonlight sonata performed with the thick,
cutting razorblades of analog synthesizers. (well, actually, i'd
prefer new music using new instrumentation..) i want to hear symphonies
composed of static and oil drums, digital and analog synths. damnit.
but maybe that's just me.
could very well be.
damnit.
c
On Mon, 01 Sep 1997 15:04:05 GMT, vsvn...@3-cities.com (VSVN ARAB)
wrote:
>So I don't think it's correct to say that because IDM artists are
>using the lastest technology available to them to create their music
>that they're relying on a gimmick. If anything, they should be
>applauded for using it in the first place.
Hmmmm... guess we don't listen to the same 'idm' artists, as most of
who I listen to would ever be able to afford the 'latest
technology'...
Alex
D13 (not...@globalserve.net) plastered all over the bandwidth...
: > > >And this is exactly why groups like Autechre, Panasonic, and Techno
: > > >Animal are a lot closer to the true spirit of industrial music than
: > > >99% of the groups working the genre of electro-industrial, a genre
: > > >full of musicians who ran out of fresh ideas at years ago.[snip]
: Autechre, out of ideas? I disagree.
:
From reading his sentence, I note that it would appear to refer to that
genre called 'electro-industrial' as lacking ideas. Not Autechre,
Panasonic, and Techno Animal. They aren't electro-industrial. Not even
close in my estimation.
May I suggest not being so quick to disagree and reading the text
carefully before responding?
F.
--
Erm... Yeah. Whatever.
small words of sleep
VSVN ARAB wrote:
>
> br...@sonic.net (c) wrote:
>
> >On Mon, 01 Sep 1997 15:04:05 GMT, vsvn...@3-cities.com (VSVN ARAB)
> >wrote:
>
> >>So I don't think it's correct to say that because IDM artists are
> >>using the lastest technology available to them to create their music
> >>that they're relying on a gimmick. If anything, they should be
> >>applauded for using it in the first place.
>
> >Hmmmm... guess we don't listen to the same 'idm' artists, as most of
> >who I listen to would ever be able to afford the 'latest
> >technology'...
>
> Hello? That's exactly why I said "the latest technology available to
> them." Reread that over again.
>
> I'm well aware that most idm artists don't have anything close to
> state-of-the-art tech. What I am getting at here is that the
> technology that is available to them is used to a greater extent as
> compared to electro-industrial artists who use the same kind of tech,
> more or less.
actually, i'm not sure what idm artists either of you are referring to,
but most of the bigger names, i.e. aphex twin, fsol, autechre, etc. all
have state-of-the-art relatively new computers and samplers as well as
some older analog gear. of course, they all started off with next to
nothing and did wonders with that as well...
np: autechre "second scepe"
--
Here lies a youth who died of consumption:
you know why
Do not pray for him
Phlegm8907
as far as the vocals thing, i think the more vocals, the more potential to
be in "pop music" territory. so many of these guys trying to sound angsty
or doing the heavy-metal werewolf growl or doing the trent reznor schtick.
to me, that stuff has little to do with an INDUSTRIAL AESTHETIC, if there
even is one anymore-- it's arguable since much of the music discussed in
this group is little more than offbeat rock using electronics or what have
you-- certainly not experimental o industrial in the sense of the pioneers
of that genre. i would say DEVO are more of a "true" industrial band in
terms of aesthetic and strategy than this gothy post-NIN stuff.
phlegmmi altamont
"the only time i wanna hear about a cop being given a flower is when it's
in a flowerpot from a high window." (w.s.burroughs)
"sit in a box, watching a box, eating out of a box: self-storage is what
we aspire to." (titwrench)
badass industrial cyborf
> Autechre, out of ideas? I disagree.
but while autechre is a creative force, like the best artists
in modern electronix, they have their own limitations. much of
their composition is decidedly on the simple side melodically.
while in terms of sound and texture, they thrash boundaries,
they remain comfortably behind the (melodic) minimalism
forged by the likes of philip glass...
this is not an insult or complaint against their art,
but a merely an observation that while the idm (or whatever)
genre offers much in the way of sound, it offers much less
in the way of melodic complexity (i.e. counterpoint, tonal
in addition to atonal, etc.)
not that the current crop of industrial music offers much
in the way of melodic depth, although mentallo + the fixer's
instrumentalist offerings are brilliant exceptions, as well
as forma tadre's "navigator" (though oweing much to gyorgi
ligeti and tangerine dream).
Thin White Duke
In article <340A87...@mail.ggg.net>, badass industrial cyborf
<cyb...@mail.ggg.net> wrote:
<snip>
= but spending all of your time on one side of the fence only to neglect
= the other. something is desperately missing from all modern forms of
= electronic music. that something
= is music.
=
= not traditional a-b-a-b.bridge.a-b pop structure (god knows industrial
= musicians beat this to death), not avant garde minimalism (someone else
= knows that trance techno/ambient composers beat This to death)...
= but real, explorative, innovative, advanced, simple, consonate and
= dissonate musical structure.
=
= god damnit why is the most beautiful, mesmarizing, and complex music
= in the world still performed on 300 year old ACOUSTIC instruments??
= where is the edge? where is the noise? where is the (post) modern
= sound?
=
=
= neo-classical music most be re-invented. and it must be invented
= through the underground of electronic music.
The problem isn't that the innovation isn't there... the problem is that
you're not listening to the right bands. Have you heard Autechre, or Coil?
Both of these bands have been able to tear apart the traditional structures
of music and make real, explorative, innovative, advanced, simple, complex,
consonant and dissonant musical structures with diverse, interesting
instrumentation.
Thin White Duke hath spoken
(np: NEW KINGDOM paradise don't come cheap)
--
Thin White Duke € de...@columbia.edu € http://www.columbia.edu/~dek17/
P. Werner
Chris H. Chatham <cha...@smart.net> wrote:
> I just had to speak up for the pro-vocal faction - I'm sick of all
> these vocalless bands.
> I'd love to hear the so-called intelligent techno groups try
> to add vocals. I'm sure that would reveal EXACTLY how powerful the
> intellects behind IDM are... .
This argument that the use of lyrics is somehow more intelligent or
challenging than doing instrumental music is patently absurd. Do you
really think that the reason, say, Bach, didn't use lyrics (choral music
not withstanding) was because he wasn't smart enough to? Or an example
from closer to home - John Balance is probably the most sublime lyricist
to come out of the whole industrial milieu (give "Ostia" a listen
sometime), yet most of Coil's work is instrumental. OTOH, most elektro
or metal industrial bands reveal anything but intelligence with their
"scary" serial killer lyrics.
I won't even take on your silly argument that a pop music structure is
a measure of musical quality, since VSVN/ARAB is doing a good job of
taking that to task.
> >And this is exactly why groups like Autechre, Panasonic, and Techno
> >Animal are a lot closer to the true spirit of industrial music than
> >99% of the groups working the genre of electro-industrial, a genre
> >full of musicians who ran out of fresh ideas at years ago.[snip]
> Why do you expect the music of "industrial" groups today to
> satisfy its forefathers' musical ethics of TWENTY years ago? It is
> you who cling to the past - and a more distant one.
OK, so regression from those ideas back into the archaic ideology of
rock'n'roll is a step forward? Nonsense! And in any event, I would
hardly consider pale imitations of what Chris & Cosey and Cabaret
Voltaire (never mind F242) were doing over 10 years ago to be terribly
progressive. OTOH, the ideas behind Industrial were and are very
relevant and still quite capable of engendering genuine innovation.
VSVN ARAB <vsvn...@3-cities.com> writes:
>And this is exactly why groups like Autechre, Panasonic, and Techno
>Animal are a lot closer to the true spirit of industrial music than
>99% of the groups working the genre of electro-industrial, a genre
>full of musicians who ran out of fresh ideas at years ago.
I'd go further and say that much of Autechre's work *is* industrial;
listen to a track like "Foil" or "Second Bad Vibel" - these tracks have
the classic metallic, dysphonic sound that characterizes industrial, but
at the same time they're innovative and push the sound forward to a new
level. Oddly enough, this isn't what gets called "industrial" anymore
(though judging by some of the posts on this group, they do have a wide
following here) - the bands that generally call themselves "industrial"
these days play warmed over synth-pop and heavy metal, with the
superficial addition of a few industrial elements and motifs (distorted
vocals, samples, bleak dystopian references, ad nauseum). It shows you
how accurate labels are.
I know this kind of criticism will be taken as a dismissive put-down
(and it is in part), but I really intend it as more of a challenge to
those of you who are creating "industrial" music (whatever that may mean
to you) - try moving it forward rather than spinning it in a well-worn
rut.
Beast of Eden
--
The Academic Left is neither.
VSVN ARAB
br...@sonic.net (c) wrote:
>On Mon, 01 Sep 1997 15:04:05 GMT, vsvn...@3-cities.com (VSVN ARAB)
>wrote:
>>So I don't think it's correct to say that because IDM artists are
>>using the lastest technology available to them to create their music
>>that they're relying on a gimmick. If anything, they should be
>>applauded for using it in the first place.
>Hmmmm... guess we don't listen to the same 'idm' artists, as most of
>who I listen to would ever be able to afford the 'latest
>technology'...
Hello? That's exactly why I said "the latest technology available to
them." Reread that over again.
I'm well aware that most idm artists don't have anything close to
state-of-the-art tech. What I am getting at here is that the
technology that is available to them is used to a greater extent as
compared to electro-industrial artists who use the same kind of tech,
more or less.
VSVN ARAB
D13
P. Werner <boe...@u.washington.edu> wrote in article
<5ugbgl$p...@nntp5.u.washington.edu>...
> Chris H. Chatham <cha...@smart.net> wrote:
>
> > I just had to speak up for the pro-vocal faction - I'm sick of all
> > these vocalless bands.
>
> > I'd love to hear the so-called intelligent techno groups try
> > to add vocals. I'm sure that would reveal EXACTLY how powerful the
> > intellects behind IDM are... .
I think we need more industrial groups who focus more on the music than vox
IMO. Black Lung, Noise Unit and Coil are all good examples. I like the
concept of IDM/industrial but i'm not sure if anyone else here is into
that......
> > >And this is exactly why groups like Autechre, Panasonic, and Techno
> > >Animal are a lot closer to the true spirit of industrial music than
> > >99% of the groups working the genre of electro-industrial, a genre
> > >full of musicians who ran out of fresh ideas at years ago.[snip]
Autechre, out of ideas? I disagree.
d13
Chris H. Chatham
P. Werner said:
>> I'd love to hear the so-called intelligent techno groups try
>> to add vocals. I'm sure that would reveal EXACTLY how powerful the
>> intellects behind IDM are... .
>
>This argument that the use of lyrics is somehow more intelligent or
>challenging than doing instrumental music is patently absurd.
Christ, can't you read? The sentence you quoted said adding vocals would
_reveal_ the intelligence, not require higher intelligence, nor anything to
that effect.
>Do you
>really think that the reason, say, Bach, didn't use lyrics (choral music
>not withstanding) was because he wasn't smart enough to?
Look, you can grandstand all you want, but the fact is I never said
anything of the sort.
>I won't even take on your silly argument that a pop music structure is
>a measure of musical quality [...]
Obviously you won't even take the time to read the (perhaps silly)
argument itself. I merely defended the repititive pop music structure by
likening its effects to the transcendence of repitition present in IDM. If
you're refering to my sports-and-poem metaphors, then read them again; you'll
see that the use of the poem metaphor is antithetical to the sports metaphor.
That was intended.
>> Why do you expect the music of "industrial" groups today to
>> satisfy its forefathers' musical ethics of TWENTY years ago? It is
>> you who cling to the past - and a more distant one.
>
>OK, so regression from those ideas back into the archaic ideology of
>rock'n'roll is a step forward? Nonsense!
Yet another fallacy. Is using the chorus/verse structure necessarily
atavistic? OF COURSE FUCKING NOT. Your statement allows us to infer that
you believe innovation is not possible within the chorus/verse pattern
anymore. I don't agree with that, and furthermore the position is not
tenable.
>OTOH, the ideas behind Industrial were and are very
>relevant and still quite capable of engendering genuine innovation.
Absolutely. And "the ideas behind Industrial," as you put it, have
never been read to me. Had they been read, I'm sure they wouldn't outlaw the
use of vocals structured in chorus/verse.
>I know this kind of criticism will be taken as a dismissive put-down
>(and it is in part),
Peter, I've seen your posts as boe...@something.or.other for a long
time, and I respect you, but it seems that you've dismissed me - as you have
"'industrial' these days" - without listening very carefully.
>[to] you who are creating "industrial" music (whatever that may mean
>to you) - try moving it forward rather than spinning it in a well-worn
>rut.
Does your vision of a forward musical movement exclude vocals sung in
a chorus/verse style? Is it not yet obvious that VSVN/ARAB's distinction is
superficial, and denies the possibility of innovation within the EXTREMELY
VAGUE limits of chorus/verse?
The one idea I await noise/IDM/self-righteous-innovators to learn, is
that there will always be indestructible boundaries. Perhaps you've come to
the 44kHz boundary of cd quality recording, or perhaps you've come to
financial boundaries of purchasing equipment, or perhaps you've come to the
frequency boundaries of the human ear - and I hope that, despite all previous
artists who have innovated within these same immutable limitations, you can
take heart and reconsider your nihilism. Perhaps you'll learn that, although
destruction is not negative, you must not always destroy to build.
________________________________cHRIscHATHAm________________________________
FS jake J
lyrics do not belong with good music. The whole time I was a skinny puppy
fan I hated ogre's shit and loved cevins music. I was pretened to like the
meaning and feeling of ogre's lyrics , but come on , they are horrible !!
Most of the time lyrics ruin really good music. Occasional lyrics are
great . what i don't understand is why most groups restrict the vocals to
singing lyrics. The human voice is the most versitile musical instrument
in exsistence and it can be used for so much more. Not just whining about
problems, or an ex girlfriend ( NIN ) , or complaing about world problems
(ATR). Some people are so closed minded that they hate music without
words. Like I was listening to autechre in the car while carting my sister
around with her friends. All they could do was dis it because it did not
have words.
I just get sick & tired of people that can't be more open minded. When
you listen to music your not suppose to feel someone elses pain or get
angry towards the government. You are suppose to feel good and be
entertained by the music itself.
It's the same with noise. Nobody around here listens to noise ( or even
real industrial for that matter ) , like when I listen to it they say "
What is this ? this is just a bunch of noise " , or " What do yoiu like
about noise ?" <--- that is about a stupid question as " what do you like
about music ?" , they are to completely different forms of expression in
audio.
I am not going to proofread this or make it more understandable
쐺 you are obese,grossly overweight,extremely fat,adipose,corpulent,fleshy
, portly,rotund,stout,swollen,thickset,unwieldy,and
FATTY FAT FATAT FAT
brought to you by Jake & the FATman ( but jake killed the fatman )
JMJ
lucian X
>I just get sick & tired of people that can't be more open minded.
you know, something's not quite right with that.
>쐺 you are obese,grossly overweight,extremely fat,adipose,corpulent,fleshy
>, portly,rotund,stout,swollen,thickset,unwieldy,and
>FATTY FAT FATAT FAT
>brought to you by Jake & the FATman ( but jake killed the fatman )
do it brother jake.
(someone's been smoking the crack rock)
.lx
[np: aphex twin // selected ambient works vol. 2]
--
[ lucian X is TM and (c) 1978 God . all rights reserved . patent pending ]
[ http://gladstone.uoregon.edu/~lucian/index.html . the personal website ]
[ http://gladstone.uoregon.edu/~lucian/lxl.html . electronic soundscapes ]
Chris H. Chatham
VSVN ARAB attacks the argument's roots:
>So I don't think it's correct to say that because IDM artists are
>using the lastest technology available to them to create their music
>that they're relying on a gimmick.
You're right. I think now that gimmick was a bad word choice - I
suppose I mean that if their intelligence is conveyed by the way they shape
and manipulate sounds, it's sure a lot harder to understand what's being
conveyed than it would be if they just spoke up.
>And who's to say what is exactly the most simple form of expression?
I think it's pretty universally recognized that speech is the most
simple form.
>But, if I do remember correctly what started this discussion in the
>first place, you had made a comment about how IDM artists could prove
>exactly how powerful their intellects are by writing lyrics for their
>songs. And this is what confuses me, because if, as you said, the most
>simple forms of expression allow the most precise depiction of one's
>intelligence, then by using lyrics in a song you've already lost the
>most simple form of expression - just the music itself.
So here's where we disagree - I think the most simple form of
expression is saying what you mean. IMO, by using lyrics one is upholding
the most concrete and simple aspect of the art, on which the music
elaborates.
>they
>will have proven to everyone that their intellects are more powerful
>than electro-industrial artists ;] ;] ;]
:)
>Are IDM artists arrogant because they have more ways to shape and
>manipulate their sounds at their disposal?
>Are they arrogant because they want to use the technology the have at
>their disposal to its fullest extent?
No, I refered to the title "I[ntelligent]DM" when I used the words
unjustifiably arrogant.
>Wrong! If you can actually make a piece of music that really affects
>people and you've done that without falling back on the crutch of the
>pop music structure, then you know you've really done something great.
You're right again. I do, however, think there's something to be
said for structure; from the hiaku to iambic pentameter, culture values this
sort of discipline.
>what does sports have to do with music/art?
They were an illustration of the value of structure. Perhaps I
should have used iambic pentameter, oh well.
>I take it that you don't like abstract art or appreciate surrealism
>and dadaism? do you like your music/art to have as many rules as
>possible so that you won't be afraid of getting lost?
Hey now. :) No personal stuff, please; Beast of Eden and I already
went through that. And as a matter of fact, I think the ideas behind dadaism
and surrealism are really intellectually stimulating. Tzara and Freud were
geniuses; Duchamp and Dali were greats. However, I fail to see the intellect
behind innovation for innovation's sake, as in the case of IDM.
>It might have sounded better if you said "what is a recipe without
>directions?" (taking us back to the whole pop-structure/formula thing
I think I should have said, "what is a recipe for apple pie created
only to overthrow cherry pie?"
>And this is exactly why I hate pop music. It
>brainwashes you from birth and makes it so that you only enjoy music
>when it's structured in that one specific way.
Very possible. But I don't think you need to worry about pop music
suddenly disappearing from the planet, and so long as there are people who
enjoy it what does it matter?
>Some people say rules are made to be broken. And within the music/art
>world they're usually broken for the better. And usually they are
>broken by those people who are much too creative to be confined by the
>rules. 90% of everyone else just copies the innovators and runs their
>ideas into the ground.
Yeah, geez, that Shakespeare guy was really derivative. Iambic
pentameter is such a formula!
>> The crux of your argument seems to be that this structure
>>eliminates the possibility for original music.
>
>At the very least it greatly reduces the possibility.
How precious the rare stone...
>Allowing a single beat? If you only knew how ironic that was...
Alright, tell me. Is there some Autechre song with a single beat?
Yeah, I know it's ironic since there's music without beats; I've had my dose
of Humanmeshdance (see, I've listened too). Anyway, fill me in.
>Once you hear the first 30 seconds of an electro-industrial song you
>almost already know everything that is going to happen until the end
>of the song.
Listen to Kalte Farben. Listen to Index. Listen to the new THD
song.
>But most of those bands and their choruses don't do much for me.
Are you kidding? Just when I thought no one could escape the fearful
clutches of pop. That's incredible. Just as you might pity those people
conditioned into liking only pop music, I can't help but wonder if you don't
enjoy pop songs the way other people do.
>I would think that an even bigger triumph is when you can compose
>something that really sticks with people without sticking to the
>formula.
Perfectly said. Now where can I hear some of it?
>Let me restate the original question again:
>How come it is that fans of electro-industrial, a genre where both the
>musicians and the fans seem to be obsessed about technology and how it
>shapes our world, would rather have their music reflect the technology
>and music of 10 years ago, rather than that of today?
I meant to address this question byway of another question. The
reason I like, as you say, this music and technology of 10 years ago is that
it always seems new to me; I can always appreciate a good pop hook. And I
can appreciate a good goth chorus. It's not always so light and ditty as it
probably sounds, though perhaps it sounds merely dated to you.
>I think it's too bad that they've regressed so much that
>they need to rely on artistic crutches to get their music across to
>audiences who apparently need everything spoon-fed to them in
>easy-to-swallow packages.
Using a chorus and a verse is not necessarily an artistic crutch.
Were it, I would share your scorn - but like I said earlier, there are new
thoughts being communicated through this same old structure. And for this,
Soft Cell's "Numbers" is as different from Kalte Farben's "DryWet" as Hamlet
is from A Midsummer Night's Dream.
>Of course I expect [...] at the very least to subscribe to one of
>the biggest priniciples of what industrial was about - breaking down
>the tyranny of pop music.
This is the philosophy around which Industrial is centered? Holy
fuck, all these years I've been listening to "innovators" counter-culturally
opposed to pop-music? That is most immature thing I've heard all day. I'd
rather hear some of FLA's lyrics than know that I'm listening to Autechre, a
group following in the footsteps of bands inspired only to break down the
"tyranny" of pop music. Isn't there a more profound reason to make music?
[For profound music by way of lyrics, listen to Covenant.]
>You totally contradict yourself here, once again. You said that a
>piece of music is more satisfying if it sticks to the rules, yet you
>think IDM does like daddy - wouldn't that make it more satisfying in
>your book???
There's no contradiction here. Yes, IDM does just like daddy. And
daddy was a nihilistic rebel who's biggest idea was to break down pop music,
if what you said was correct. There were no rules there, there was no
structure, no difficulty, and little intellect.
>Why does electro-industrial have to be so linear? Why not zig-zag
>around and go in a few circles? Take a road less traveled, get lost
>somewhere and have a little adventure ;]
Good advice. I hope electro-industrial artists are listening. And I hope
they don't consider this an invitation to participate in the moronic batlle
to overthrow pop music - because first of all, it's plain stupid, and second
of all, you'll lose.
________________________________cHRIscHATHAm_______________________________
FS jake J
>you know, something's not quite right with that.
hahaha , yah your right kinda sounding like a contradiction. I use to
only listen to music with words , but then I became more open minded and
listened to all different types of music. I should have put IMO lyrics do
not belong with good music
쐺 you are obese,grossly overweight,extremely fat,adipose,corpulent,fleshy
, portly,rotund,stout,swollen,thickset,unwieldy,and
FATTY FAT FATAT FAT
brought to you by Jake & the FATman ( but jake killed the fatman )
JMJ
badass industrial cyborf
> you must not always destroy to build.
agreed. but why are verse-chorus and repetitive minimalism (or repetitive
constructionalism without a confident sense of architecture) the only
alternatives?
working consistantly within the abab-ab structure does lend itself to
boredom, just as working consistanly in "loop in-loop out" dj-derivative
beats does. but neither algorithym has been thoroughly exhausted by
the music world yet. it is the depth to which one relies upon convention
that determines the fate of the music.
but structuralism does not have to take the form of verse-chorus.
by composing in movements, phrases, and integrated segments one
can establish an economy of repetition without falling into the
traps predictablity.
for instance,
a-a-b-c-a-b-d-e-d-a-c-e-f.. etc.
Morrigu198
cha...@smart.net (Chris H. Chatham) argued-
>VSVN ARAB attacks the argument's roots:
>>So I don't think it's correct to say that because IDM artists are
>>using the lastest technology available to them to create their music
>>that they're relying on a gimmick.
>You're right. I think now that gimmick was a bad word choice - I
>suppose I mean that if their intelligence is conveyed by the way they shape
>and manipulate sounds, it's sure a lot harder to understand what's being
>conveyed than it would be if they just spoke up.
Maybe they don't want to speak in the common form of language, like it or
not you can't denounce their choice of medium for communication. They are
speaking up, maybe not in the form you want to hear it, which is your choice.
>>And who's to say what is exactly the most simple form of expression?
>I think it's pretty universally recognized that speech is the most
>simple form.
When in fact studies show the human brain relies more on other means of
communication that whats being said (body language, etc) in a discussion
between two people...again, its a VERY subjective issue
>>But, if I do remember correctly what started this discussion in the
>>first place, you had made a comment about how IDM artists could prove
>>exactly how powerful their intellects are by writing lyrics for their
>>songs. And this is what confuses me, because if, as you said, the most
>>simple forms of expression allow the most precise depiction of one's
>>intelligence, then by using lyrics in a song you've already lost the
>>most simple form of expression - just the music itself.
>So here's where we disagree - I think the most simple form of
>expression is saying what you mean. IMO, by using lyrics one is upholding
>the most concrete and simple aspect of the art, on which the music
>elaborates.
Well, Faust writes in German, Rumi in Arabic, Lautreamont in French...yet
all can be acknowledged as "intelligent"...what's to exclude forms of sound
beyond abstracted human language in this?
>No, I refered to the title "I[ntelligent]DM" when I used the words
>unjustifiably arrogant.
In a "dance" scene glutted with marjor media garbage, this title is
nessecary...anyway, judging artists on their merit is much better, unless
of course you want me to deduce that as an "industrial" listener who
fratrinizes with germans in combat boots and members of bands like
Borghesia and Boyd Rice who have joined fascist causes that you must be a nazi..
>>Wrong! If you can actually make a piece of music that really affects
>>people and you've done that without falling back on the crutch of the
>>pop music structure, then you know you've really done something great.
>You're right again. I do, however, think there's something to be
>said for structure; from the hiaku to iambic pentameter, culture values this
>sort of discipline.
Quite alot of IDM depends heavily on structure...ever heard of polyrhythms?
>what does sports have to do with music/art?
They were an illustration of the value of structure. Perhaps I
should have used iambic pentameter, oh well.
>Hey now. :) No personal stuff, please; Beast of Eden and I already
>went through that. And as a matter of fact, I think the ideas behind dadaism
>and surrealism are really intellectually stimulating. Tzara and Freud were
>geniuses; Duchamp and Dali were greats. However, I fail to see the intellect
>behind innovation for innovation's sake, as in the case of IDM.
Last I heard, the high council of IDM didn't publish a mission statement
citing its purpose as "innovation for innovation's sake".
>I think I should have said, "what is a recipe for apple pie created
>only to overthrow cherry pie?"
Possibly a damned good apple pie that in its "radical" nature awakens one
tired with the basic cherry pie (as well baked as they can be) to a fresh
new array of satisyfing sensations.
>>Some people say rules are made to be broken. And within the music/art
>>world they're usually broken for the better. And usually they are
>>broken by those people who are much too creative to be confined by the
>>rules. 90% of everyone else just copies the innovators and runs their
>>ideas into the ground.
>Yeah, geez, that Shakespeare guy was really derivative. Iambic
>pentameter is such a formula!
The _millions_ of songs with quater note 4/4 rhythms *are* formulaic
however, and as you said there are exceptions, but there are freedoms found
in transcending that as well.
>>> The crux of your argument seems to be that this structure
>>>eliminates the possibility for original music.
>>
>>At the very least it greatly reduces the possibility.
>How precious the rare stone...
Innovative and fresh music is quite rare itself...
>>Allowing a single beat? If you only knew how ironic that was...
>Alright, tell me. Is there some Autechre song with a single beat?
>Yeah, I know it's ironic since there's music without beats; I've had my dose
>of Humanmeshdance (see, I've listened too). Anyway, fill me in.
Listen to "444" off of Incunabula, which a single measure looped over 8
minutes remains appealing beneath the constantly changing fills overneath,
or "Bronchsvenmx24" off of Tri Repatae ++, whose polyrhythm deceives you
into thinking you're hearing constantly shifting patterns, until you
realize the intricacy of it all, etc etc...all of them take a decidedly
different approach to creative percussion.
>>Once you hear the first 30 seconds of an electro-industrial song you
>>almost already know everything that is going to happen until the end
>>of the song.
>Listen to Kalte Farben. Listen to Index. Listen to the new THD
>song.
And I still find it breathtakingly predictable and banal, but hey,
different strokes..
</cliche>
>Are you kidding? Just when I thought no one could escape the fearful
>clutches of pop. That's incredible. Just as you might pity those people
>conditioned into liking only pop music, I can't help but wonder if you don't
>enjoy pop songs the way other people do.
*points to Depeche Mode cd next to Merzbow in his cd rack*
I apprecriate music on its merits and the way it speaks to me, not in a
"my dad can beat up your dad!" way, pitting genres against each other.
>>I would think that an even bigger triumph is when you can compose
>>something that really sticks with people without sticking to the
>>formula.
>Perfectly said. Now where can I hear some of it?
That's the appeal many seek in "progressive" and "innovative" music....the
fact that unabashedly new and unchartered territories of sound leave quite
an impression. The first time I heard Boyd Rice (Black Album era at least)
I was blown away by the lack of defined structure to his music, the way
playing it in reverse or off axis could yield endless possibilities, the
way the user could be free to find their own hooks and patterns (or lack
of) in the music.
>I meant to address this question byway of another question. The
>reason I like, as you say, this music and technology of 10 years ago is that
>it always seems new to me; I can always appreciate a good pop hook. And I
>can appreciate a good goth chorus. It's not always so light and ditty as it
>probably sounds, though perhaps it sounds merely dated to you.
As can I...I can also accept the motivation of artists without labeling
them false or pretensious because they don't write like Kalte Farben
>Using a chorus and a verse is not necessarily an artistic crutch.
>Were it, I would share your scorn - but like I said earlier, there are new
>thoughts being communicated through this same old structure. And for this,
>Soft Cell's "Numbers" is as different from Kalte Farben's "DryWet" as Hamlet
>is from A Midsummer Night's Dream.
An an IDM song in 7/4 is different that one in 3/4, one with parallel
4th's different than consectutive 7th's.
>I'd rather hear some of FLA's lyrics than know that I'm listening to
Autechre, a
>group following in the footsteps of bands inspired only to break down the
>"tyranny" of pop music. Isn't there a more profound reason to make music?
>[For profound music by way of lyrics, listen to Covenant.]
If you knew a single thing about Autechre (which I'm not saying you have
too, unless of course you want to be presumptuous), you'd know they have
one of the most UN-pretensious motivations for making music, perhaps
deceptively simple.
"We just needed something good to listen to"-Sean Booth
Good music for good music's sake, sounds pretty good, don't you agree?
>There's no contradiction here. Yes, IDM does just like daddy. And
>daddy was a nihilistic rebel who's biggest idea was to break down pop music,
>if what you said was correct. There were no rules there, there was no
>structure, no difficulty, and little intellect.
Innovation is an ongoing process. What I consider to be the most
innovative artists are the ones that constantly push beyond their current
level of acheivement. Autechre, for instance, have brought, album after
album a new edge to their sound while maintaining a certain identity to it
(Incunabula and Amber have many parallels). Lack of rules doesn't mean
lack of intellect either. Yes, there were disposable art movements (some
of dada served only the purpose to bring catharsis to a tired art scene at
the trun of the century..it's acheivements lived through the way it
inspired new forms of art to emmerge), but I don't listen to Scorn because
it's not pop music. Rather, it's beautiful, intelligent, and radically
paradigm shifting music.
-Ben
small words of sleep
badass industrial cyborf wrote:
> god damnit why is the most beautiful, mesmarizing, and complex music
> in the world still performed on 300 year old ACOUSTIC instruments??
> where is the edge? where is the noise? where is the (post) modern
> sound?
because one can do a lot more complex writing when writing for a full
orchestra composing a few dozen highly-trained musicians using many
different expressive instruments, as opposed to a six-voice juno 106.
different instruments lead to different compositions...although it would
be interesting to see more idm type musicians score something for an
orchestra, just to see what they'd come up with. well, i guess we've
already seen richard james' contribution.
np: fsol "dirty shadows"
Thin White Duke
In article <19970902190...@ladder02.news.aol.com>, fsj...@aol.com
(FS jake J) wrote:
= lyrics do not belong with good music. The whole time I was a skinny puppy
= fan I hated ogre's shit and loved cevins music. I was pretened to like the
= meaning and feeling of ogre's lyrics , but come on , they are horrible !!
= Most of the time lyrics ruin really good music. Occasional lyrics are
= great . what i don't understand is why most groups restrict the vocals to
= singing lyrics. The human voice is the most versitile musical instrument
= in exsistence and it can be used for so much more. Not just whining about
= problems, or an ex girlfriend ( NIN ) , or complaing about world problems
= (ATR). Some people are so closed minded that they hate music without
= words. Like I was listening to autechre in the car while carting my sister
= around with her friends. All they could do was dis it because it did not
= have words.
I *highly* recommend that you listen to the album Logghi Barogghi by Scorn,
if you have not already. That album features the most innovative and
interesting use of the human voice that I've EVER heard. There are no
lyrics, besides about three or four words on the entire album. But Mick
Harris uses his voice (or is it a sampled voice?) as an instrument, seeing
how he can distort and bend the sound and make it part of the music.
Also, wasn't there at least one song on Autechre's Tri Repetae++ that was
made from lots of vocal samples chopped up into such tiny little bits that
they're not even distinguishable as vocals?
As far as Ogre's lyrics go, they fit into two categories: absolutely
brilliant or totally incomprehensible. On a few songs (e.g. Addiction,
Testure, Grave Wisdom) the lyrics, the vocal style and distortion, and the
music make a perfect blend. But for the most part, Ogre's specialty is
vocal styles, not lyrical content. He knows how to modulate his voice
properly and use the right distortion to set the mood for the music
perfectly. Addiction is the archetypical example of his mastering of what
can only be called the Ogre vocal technique, in which it sounds to me like
he is speaking as several different distinct characters... or rather you
can sense the internal breakup of the drug user as the vocal styling and
treatments change throughout the song. It's a technique which Marilyn
Manson shamelessly rips off, especially in Sweet Dreams.
However, let's not forget that on many SP songs, while Ogre sounds great,
the lyrics make no sense at all. Take Morpheus Laughing. If anyone can
explain to me a logical interpretation of the meaning of "a spectre so
violent in its views lies impervious altitude" I'll be very impressed.
I've been scratching my head about that one for years.
Thin White Duke
(np: nothing but the odd assortment of sounds bouncing around in my head)
small words of sleep
Chris H. Chatham wrote:
> So here's where we disagree - I think the most simple form of
> expression is saying what you mean. IMO, by using lyrics one is upholding
> the most concrete and simple aspect of the art, on which the music
> elaborates.
but why must an artist be so bloody obvious as to state his exact
intentions all the time? i prefer a little mystery myself. i don't give
a fuck what fsol were thinking when they wrote this song i'm listening
to, for example, i'd rather create my own interpretations rather than
being handed theirs. is an artist not intelligent if they don't want to
shove their ideals down your throat? or if they don't care enough about
any sort of world issues to bother writing about them? and what if they
can't sing, anyway? god knows i can't...
> I think I should have said, "what is a recipe for apple pie created
> only to overthrow cherry pie?"
but i think in the case of idm, it's "what is a recipe to make a better
apple pie than i made last time? and leave the cherry pie to cherry pie
bakers".
> This is the philosophy around which Industrial is centered? Holy
> fuck, all these years I've been listening to "innovators" counter-culturally
> opposed to pop-music? That is most immature thing I've heard all day. I'd
> rather hear some of FLA's lyrics than know that I'm listening to Autechre, a
> group following in the footsteps of bands inspired only to break down the
> "tyranny" of pop music. Isn't there a more profound reason to make music?
i think you're confusing industrial with idm here. industrial, a la
throbbing gristle or spk, was definitely originally intended as an
anti-pop/anti-muzak/anti-commercial music industry sort of thing.
but idm doesn't necessarily subscribe to those principles...autechre et
al. write music that *they* enjoy, and release it for those other people
who enjoy it...
np: fsol "egypt"
Patrick McGuirk
I love threads like these - they never cease to make me laugh. Endless
variants of "that music isn't industrial" or "industrial is dead" or "the
scene is stagnating".
Well, no shit, Sherlock - with fans like you who needs critics?
For five years I've been reading you whine and whine. You all sound like
Trent Reznor singing on a broken record. If you think the scene has
stagnated - listen to something else; its amazing what kinda of really
innovative music lies out there in the "world", "new age", and "novelty"
sections, not to mention "alternative."
Some of you complain that you've grown up with industrial and that you've
grown tired of it and that it all sounds the same - maybe you're the same
and you need change yourself. Hell I got damn sick of classic rock and
that's when I started listening to Front 242, Nitzer Ebb and KMFDM and was
gradually introduced to more non-rock music than I could possibly exhaust.
Of course, I get tired too - so I turn on the radio and listen to polka.
But what really kills me - what sends me rolling, is the aesthetic
arguments on here about "what music is". Some people start critiquing
artists because they lack melody, lyrics, harmony - and some argue back
that all industrial is anti-music and should be increasingly dissonant and
noisey. Well, hot damn! You're all weasals and I think skinning you
alive and recording the tearing and screaming and playing it to a 150 BPM
EBM IDM aggrorock electro intelligent house break beat would be about the
most cyber kewl thing I could ever hear. But I'd get arrested, and you'd
die - and eventually the whiney babies I sold the tape to would get sick
of it and write me letters that I could tape up in my cell "You sold out!"
"there's no melody" "all you do is scream - write some fuckin lyrics!"
and probably a couple of those irritating "Can I have the ultra limited
human skin covered box set edition - this domestic copy with bonus remixes
makes me look like a posuer." but of course they can't get it cuz some
crazy computer programmer and huge fan went to the police auction after
the trial and paid his annual income for 'em: all 2500. But now there's
only 23 left in good condition cuz he Onanized the rest.
YOU PEOPLE MAKE ME ILL - I QUIT THE NEWSGROUP - IF YOU WANNA SEE ME, I'LL
BE AT THE FLEETWOOD MAC TOUR THIS FALL.
Patrick
NP: "Roll out the barrel..."
P. Werner
small words of sleep <********@ix.netcom.com> writes:
>> I think I should have said, "what is a recipe for apple pie created
>> only to overthrow cherry pie?"
>but i think in the case of idm, it's "what is a recipe to make a better
>apple pie than i made last time? and leave the cherry pie to cherry pie
>bakers".
Or how about, "I've been eating cherry pie every night for the last 10
years! I really want to taste something different for a change!"
Peter
Taylor Mclaren
Thin White Duke (lo...@in.sig) wrote:
: I *highly* recommend that you listen to the album Logghi Barogghi by Scorn,
: if you have not already. That album features the most innovative and
: interesting use of the human voice that I've EVER heard.
have ever heard, but the rest of the album isn't that hot. Then again,
this *has* turned into a thread on vocal technique (among other things),
so I guess the recommendation (with a qualification or two) is valid.
As for Ogre... I'll agree with your point, but not your examples. For
sheer visceral quality, "Love in Vein" (another cute addiction song?) and
"Killing Game" are about as gut-wrenching as I think I'm ever likely to
hear. Pick, pick, pick...
-me
(I'd brag about my CD collection now, but I'm working at a terminal in
the library. Die Warzau's _Big Electric Metal Bass Face_ is in my
portable CD player, but the batteries are dead. Thank you and good night.)
lucian X
Thin White Duke <lo...@in.sig> wrote:
>As far as Ogre's lyrics go, they fit into two categories: absolutely
>brilliant or totally incomprehensible. On a few songs (e.g. Addiction,
>Testure, Grave Wisdom) the lyrics, the vocal style and distortion, and the
>music make a perfect blend.
while i'll agree on the latter examples, i simply have never been able to
stomach ogre's verse vocalization on addiction. i've always found that to
be rather disconcerting, as the music underlying is easily as strong as
the other material on mind:tpi.
>Addiction is the archetypical example of his mastering of what can only
>be called the Ogre vocal technique, in which it sounds to me like he is
>speaking as several different distinct characters... or rather you can
>sense the internal breakup of the drug user as the vocal styling and
>treatments change throughout the song.
i'll agree with the point that it is definitely a unique vocalization, and
that he does cover a lot of space within the piece to give the listener a
feel of transition from character to character, but quite frankly, i can't
take the initial voice seriously. that right there kills any atmosphere
that the intro manifests for me.
>Take Morpheus Laughing. If anyone can explain to me a logical
>interpretation of the meaning of "a spectre so violent in its views lies
>impervious altitude" I'll be very impressed. I've been scratching my
>head about that one for years.
i've always taken the 'altitude' as the first line of the next series of
phrases;
"a spectre so violent in it's views lies impervious
altitude has a tendancy (sic) under pressure to reveal its identity"
of course, what *that* means is still anyone's guess. the only thing that
occurs to me is that perhaps in the middle of this hellish future world he
is depicting, those in high places (political, etc) show their true nature
when under pressure from the masses.
.lx
[np: stairs and flowers (dub) // skinny puppy]
AsagiKoi
pmcguirk wrote (among other things):
> You all sound like
>Trent Reznor singing on a broken record.
you should be beaten to death for that lame pun
=P
VSVN ARAB
cha...@smart.net (Chris H. Chatham) wrote:
> You're right. I think now that gimmick was a bad word choice - I
>suppose I mean that if their intelligence is conveyed by the way they shape
>and manipulate sounds, it's sure a lot harder to understand what's being
>conveyed than it would be if they just spoke up.
Of course it's lot harder to understand what's being conveyed. The
more abstract something is, the more it relies on you to make for
yourself your own interpretation.
When a person like Dali paints a picture, does he paint words all over
it trying to tell you what to think about it?
So why should an IDM artist put words along with their music in order
for you to understand the abtract sonic reality that they're creating?
That's just ludicrous.
If what you're trying to express can be easily conveyed by using
words, then what is the point in creating music/art in the first
place?
What was the point of Picasso making a painting in the first place
when he could have just explained his ideas through words instead?
Why do poets speak in such a convoluted language when they could just
come out and say what they're trying to express? Along these lines,
why not throw out 80% of the english language because it contains too
many words? ;]
What's the point of whole art thing anyway, right? ;]
"IDM" artists are expressing themselves through making abstract sonic
landscapes. How do you put these kinds of things in words, and why
would you want/ need to?
"Imagine a cat being strung through a cheese grater and this sound
repeats on every other beat, while on every third offbeat you have the
sound of snake hissing being constantly modulated, etc..."
Now, what would be the most simple way to get your idea across?
Explain it through words or by playing the song? Words will never
fully express how this really sounds. IDM artists are expressing the
abtract.
"Talking about music is like dancing about architecture."
I forget who said that...
You can't really describe a piece of music by talking about it.
Isn't the point of art supposed to be making you think for yourself?
If you're told what to think, then where does your intellect come into
play?
The difference between listening to music with lyrics and instrumental
music is that the former dictates a reality to you, where as with the
latter the artist leaves the music more open to interpretation because
it's free of the baggage (words) that makes for a more biased
interpretation.
>>And who's to say what is exactly the most simple form of expression?
> I think it's pretty universally recognized that speech is the most
>simple form.
No, you express yourself more simply by doing, not by saying.
Why do you think people say talk is cheap? Because talk doesn't really
mean anything. Ultimately it's the actions that matter.
Not until you actually experience something, do you understand what
that "thing" is. Grok.
>>But, if I do remember correctly what started this discussion in the
>>first place, you had made a comment about how IDM artists could prove
>>exactly how powerful their intellects are by writing lyrics for their
>>songs. And this is what confuses me, because if, as you said, the most
>>simple forms of expression allow the most precise depiction of one's
>>intelligence, then by using lyrics in a song you've already lost the
>>most simple form of expression - just the music itself.
> So here's where we disagree - I think the most simple form of
>expression is saying what you mean. IMO, by using lyrics one is upholding
Nope. The most simple way to express yourself is by doing.
I think I covered that up above.
>the most concrete and simple aspect of the art, on which the music
>elaborates.
You think everyone who composes music is doing so in order that they
can have a platform for their lyrics? Then how come it sounds like the
lyrics are often an afterthought in electro-industrial music?
You're missing the whole point again. IDM artists aren't trying to
dictate a concrete reality to you. You're supposed to use your own
imagination when you listen to instrumental music. It demands more of
you. The most simple aspect of the art is the music itself.
You have it backwards.
The music isn't there to elaborate on the lyrics, lyrics can add to
the enjoyment of a a piece of music for some people, but it's really
the lyrics which are secondary.
Why do you think that music is secondary to lyrics in the importance
of a piece of music!?
>>Are IDM artists arrogant because they have more ways to shape and
>>manipulate their sounds at their disposal?
>>Are they arrogant because they want to use the technology the have at
>>their disposal to its fullest extent?
> No, I refered to the title "I[ntelligent]DM" when I used the words
>unjustifiably arrogant.
And are artists in control of how they're labeled? I know that many of
the artists lumped under IDM hate that phrase. So what you're saying
here is that an artist being arrogant because they've had a label
attached to them, something which they have no control over???
Personally, I hate the label. You can't even really dance to a lot of
IDM music anyway. People throw a lot of groups under this label that
really don't belong there, and this is where a lot of the confusion
comes in.
>>Wrong! If you can actually make a piece of music that really affects
>>people and you've done that without falling back on the crutch of the
>>pop music structure, then you know you've really done something great.
> You're right again. I do, however, think there's something to be
>said for structure; from the hiaku to iambic pentameter, culture values this
>sort of discipline.
Then you have people like Einstein who epitomizes what can happen if
you throw away conventions and do things the way you want to do them
without adhering to someone else's rules and ways of doing things.
I'll admit, there is something to be said for discipline. And if you
can create something artistic within those disciplines then you've
done a good job, however, if almost single piece of poetry you read is
done in haiku, then you would tire of haiku pretty quickly I think.
Either that, or you would have become so accustomed to it that you
wouldn't be able to appreciate or understand poetry written in a
different style.
And I have yet to hear something from an electro-industrial artist who
writes in a pop music structure something that I would consider a
great artistic achievement because almost everything they have done
within that structure has been done before. They use the same kind of
chord progressions, the same time signatures, the same kind of
rhythms, the same distorted vocals, etc...
Apparently you don't realize that there is also structure to IDM. But
their artists are more free to create their own structures.
>>what does sports have to do with music/art?
> They were an illustration of the value of structure. Perhaps I
>should have used iambic pentameter, oh well.
And why do a lot of 20th century poets write in free verse? Because
the other structures are limiting the amount that they can express!
>>I take it that you don't like abstract art or appreciate surrealism
>>and dadaism? do you like your music/art to have as many rules as
>>possible so that you won't be afraid of getting lost?
> Hey now. :) No personal stuff, please; Beast of Eden and I already
>went through that. And as a matter of fact, I think the ideas behind dadaism
>and surrealism are really intellectually stimulating. Tzara and Freud were
>geniuses; Duchamp and Dali were greats. However, I fail to see the intellect
>behind innovation for innovation's sake, as in the case of IDM.
Modern society is based around innovation for innovation's sake. The
computer that you're reading this post on exists for this very reason.
In a more artistic sense, there are many artists in all media that
innovate for innovation's sake, this is how new genres are born! You
wouldn't be listening to the music that you're listening to now if
people didn't do something new just for the sake of it.
>>It might have sounded better if you said "what is a recipe without
>>directions?" (taking us back to the whole pop-structure/formula thing
> I think I should have said, "what is a recipe for apple pie created
>only to overthrow cherry pie?"
These artists aren't creating their music just to overthrow pop music.
They're creating it because they want to hear something new and expose
people to new things. And in the process, showing people that there's
an infinite number of avenues to be explored in music and that pop
music is only one way to go.
Speaking of pies, wouldn't you hate it if you all you had to eat
everyday was a cherry pie? Or if the only music you heard was
pop-structured?
Pop music is equivalent to eating sweets and pies, its candy-coated
and doesn't require as much thought on behalf of the listener because
you always know what's going to happen. It's also bad for people
because when they're constantly exposed to it, it makes it harder to
appreciate music that is structured differently because they don't
understand how to listen to it.
Hey, where's the verse, where's the chorus?
Where's the lyrics?
>>And this is exactly why I hate pop music. It
>>brainwashes you from birth and makes it so that you only enjoy music
>>when it's structured in that one specific way.
> Very possible. But I don't think you need to worry about pop music
>suddenly disappearing from the planet, and so long as there are people who
>enjoy it what does it matter?
Does it matter? I don't know. Why does the music of IDM artists
concern _you_?
>>Some people say rules are made to be broken. And within the music/art
>>world they're usually broken for the better. And usually they are
>>broken by those people who are much too creative to be confined by the
>>rules. 90% of everyone else just copies the innovators and runs their
>>ideas into the ground.
> Yeah, geez, that Shakespeare guy was really derivative. Iambic
>pentameter is such a formula!
Yes, and Shakespeare lived during the Renaissance where people thought
the universe ran like clockwork and everything was ordered and
perfect. In a similar way the art of that period also mirrored this
philosophy. Today, however, scientists know that the universe is chaos
and that order and structure are just illusion. The better artists in
today's world mirror this.
>>> The crux of your argument seems to be that this structure
>>>eliminates the possibility for original music.
>>
>>At the very least it greatly reduces the possibility.
>How precious the rare stone...
So you agree that more unique music is more precious then?
>>Allowing a single beat? If you only knew how ironic that was...
> Alright, tell me. Is there some Autechre song with a single beat?
er, no. but there probably is an Ae song with a single rhythm.
>Yeah, I know it's ironic since there's music without beats; I've had my dose
>of Humanmeshdance (see, I've listened too). Anyway, fill me in.
I wa saying that it was ironic because most pop-structured music only
has one single beat.
>>Once you hear the first 30 seconds of an electro-industrial song you
>>almost already know everything that is going to happen until the end
>>of the song.
> Listen to Kalte Farben. Listen to Index. Listen to the new THD
>song.
Tape them for me and I will. I'm not going to waste my money on
something that my instincts tell me I won't like.
>>But most of those bands and their choruses don't do much for me.
> Are you kidding? Just when I thought no one could escape the fearful
>clutches of pop. That's incredible. Just as you might pity those people
>conditioned into liking only pop music, I can't help but wonder if you don't
>enjoy pop songs the way other people do.
Can't help but wonder what? That I'm sick of the same slop over and
over?
I don't like most pop music for much the same reason nursery rhyhmes
don't interest me.
Most pop music is like nursery rhymes for adults. It's candy-coated
easy-to-swallow music that the Muzak corportion likes to pump out to
get the workforce through their day.
>>I would think that an even bigger triumph is when you can compose
>>something that really sticks with people without sticking to the
>>formula.
> Perfectly said. Now where can I hear some of it?
Tell you what, you send me a tape of Kalte Farben, Index, THD, etc.
and I'll send you a tape of this music.
>>Let me restate the original question again:
>>How come it is that fans of electro-industrial, a genre where both the
>>musicians and the fans seem to be obsessed about technology and how it
>>shapes our world, would rather have their music reflect the technology
>>and music of 10 years ago, rather than that of today?
> I meant to address this question byway of another question. The
>reason I like, as you say, this music and technology of 10 years ago is that
>it always seems new to me; I can always appreciate a good pop hook. And I
>can appreciate a good goth chorus. It's not always so light and ditty as it
>probably sounds, though perhaps it sounds merely dated to you.
It sounds dated to me because most of these groups sound like they
want to sound like everyone else before them.
>>I think it's too bad that they've regressed so much that
>>they need to rely on artistic crutches to get their music across to
>>audiences who apparently need everything spoon-fed to them in
>>easy-to-swallow packages.
>
> Using a chorus and a verse is not necessarily an artistic crutch.
>Were it, I would share your scorn - but like I said earlier, there are new
>thoughts being communicated through this same old structure. And for this,
New thoughts may be communicated through it lyrically, however,
musically the artists aren't communicating anything within that
structure that hasn't been communicated before.
>Soft Cell's "Numbers" is as different from Kalte Farben's "DryWet" as Hamlet
Sure, they may be different from each other, but you're probably
forgetting the thousands of other songs that are just like them.
>>Of course I expect [...] at the very least to subscribe to one of
>>the biggest priniciples of what industrial was about - breaking down
>>the tyranny of pop music.
> This is the philosophy around which Industrial is centered? Holy
>fuck, all these years I've been listening to "innovators" counter-culturally
>opposed to pop-music? That is most immature thing I've heard all day. I'd
Right. It's immature because they want to intellectually challenge
people by offering them something different?
Because they want to show people that there's more out there than pop?
They want to show people that there's an infinite number of ways in
which to express yourself? You might call that immature, but I myself
think it's a noble thing.
>rather hear some of FLA's lyrics than know that I'm listening to Autechre, a
>group following in the footsteps of bands inspired only to break down the
>"tyranny" of pop music. Isn't there a more profound reason to make music?
They are inspired by much more than that. But they are most inspired
by creating music that is challenging and different from than norm. I
think I'd rather listen to someone with the inspiration to do
something different and unique with their music than to listen someone
who is only rehashing the same thing over and over.
>[For profound music by way of lyrics, listen to Covenant.]
You seem to be constantly stuck on the lyrical aspect of music. Why do
you think that the lyrics are more important than the music when it is
the music that makes music what it is!
If you took away the lyrics from the music, the music would still be
there, but if you take away the music from the lyrics, you wouldn't
have any music!
This is one of the main problems with your argument.
>>You totally contradict yourself here, once again. You said that a
>>piece of music is more satisfying if it sticks to the rules, yet you
>>think IDM does like daddy - wouldn't that make it more satisfying in
>>your book???
> There's no contradiction here. Yes, IDM does just like daddy. And
Yes, there is a contradiction there. If IDM does like daddy, and if
following the rules makes a piece of music more satisfying, then what
is your logic in this?
>daddy was a nihilistic rebel who's biggest idea was to break down pop music,
I said it was one of the major ideas, not the only one. It was one of
the philosophies which loosely tied many of the original industrial
groups together. The reason the philosophy helped tie the groups
together is because most of the original industrial groups had a
different sound from each other! Imagine that!
They each had their own "big ideas" and directions to go in, and it
was only through these philosophies that you could really tie them
together.
>if what you said was correct. There were no rules there, there was no
>structure, no difficulty, and little intellect.
There were rules there. BUT - Each artist mades the rules for
themselves. The same goes for structure, there's plenty of structure
but it's structured differently than pop music. Not only that, but
because of this it makes that music more difficult and more
intellectual because they have to work harder than someone who relies
on pop hooks to get their music across!
>>Why does electro-industrial have to be so linear? Why not zig-zag
>>around and go in a few circles? Take a road less traveled, get lost
>>somewhere and have a little adventure ;]
>Good advice. I hope electro-industrial artists are listening. And I hope
>they don't consider this an invitation to participate in the moronic batlle
It is quite moronic of idea to overthrow a structure if you're working
in it. I agree wholeheartedly! ;]
>to overthrow pop music - because first of all, it's plain stupid, and second
Yeah, it's stupid cuz it might mean people will wanna hear something
different.
>of all, you'll lose.
And who will determine that? Will the masses determine that, or will
the future music appreciation books in the year 3000 ultimately
determine who played a larger role in the world of music. I have a
feeling it won't be the people who did just as everyone else...
VSVN ARAB
tmcl...@uoguelph.ca (Taylor Mclaren) wrote:
>Thin White Duke (lo...@in.sig) wrote:
>: I *highly* recommend that you listen to the album Logghi Barogghi by Scorn,
>: if you have not already. That album features the most innovative and
>: interesting use of the human voice that I've EVER heard.
>Or... maybe not. Granted, "Out Of" is one of the best Scorn tracks that I
>have ever heard, but the rest of the album isn't that hot. Then again,
I think the album is a great piece of work. You still have some of the
great layered droneyness and changing textures like you had on Gyral,
but this time the drum sounds are tweaked a lot more and the rhythms
are sometimes more interesting. I really like how he accented sounds
at just the right moment in order to give the more music a greater
sense of unpredictability. You have to love the exploding snare drums
dribbling their remains all over the place ;]
VSVN ARAB
Skarekroe
:I just get sick & tired of people that can't be more open minded. When
:you listen to music your not suppose to feel someone elses pain or get
:angry towards the government. You are suppose to feel good and be
:entertained by the music itself.
says who? industrial music has never been about making you "feel good".
the early industrial musicians set out to do exactly the opposite. if you
really want instrumental feel good songs, i suggest checking out something
by lawrence welk's orchestra. millions of nursing home residents can't be
wrong.
sk
VVaveshape
>but i grew up with industrial, only to be disillusioned with its lack
>of growth. and then i re-examined classical and neo-classical music,
>and found a wealth of structural brilliance only weakened by the
>dry sounds of traditional orchestra. IT IS IN SOUND THAT NEO-CLASSICAL
>FAILS.
>
>i am trying, between school and life, to re-invent classical music in
>the eyes of electronics. i don't know if i can do it...i am trying,
>but my resources, my training..are limited. i wish someone else would!!
>i want to hear beethoven's moonlight sonata performed with the thick,
>cutting razorblades of analog synthesizers. (well, actually, i'd
>prefer new music using new instrumentation..) i want to hear symphonies
>composed of static and oil drums, digital and analog synths. damnit.
>
>but maybe that's just me.
>could very well be.
Well, LEÆTHER STRIP's "Serenade for the Dead" does this somewhat.. Moog
square waves, reverbed ambient choir patches, harsh drums.. all playing in
a neoclassical style.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
ryan reid v vave...@aol.com
ebm.noise.gabber.hardacidgoatrance.badtripambient
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
daniel landherr
badass industrial cyborf (cyb...@mail.ggg.net) wrote:
: i am trying, between school and life, to re-invent classical music in
: the eyes of electronics. i don't know if i can do it...i am trying,
: but my resources, my training..are limited. i wish someone else would!!
: i want to hear beethoven's moonlight sonata performed with the thick,
: cutting razorblades of analog synthesizers. (well, actually, i'd
: prefer new music using new instrumentation..) i want to hear symphonies
: composed of static and oil drums, digital and analog synths. damnit.
It's fucking tough, and should be appreciated when it succeeds. Coil,
Einsturzende Neubauten, SPK all accomplished this to some degree. The Box
by Orbital reminds me of what Bach would have done with a synth. The Tear
Garden, Skinny Puppy, LPD's, Download are in this direction. Autechre has
amazed me at times. Test Dept. and Savage Aural Hotbed rank up with E.N.
as far as percussion goes.
On the other hand, I think you're being too harsh on traditional forms.
While working within those forms can be limiting, it can also be very
impressive. There are two things that tend to impress me: finding new,
innovative ways to come up with something great; innovation within
pre-defined boundaries to come up with something great. Of course, I also
enjoy music that doesn't innovate at all, but simply sounds good. It
doesn't impress me objectively much though.
Dan
small words of sleep
Thin White Duke wrote:
> Also, wasn't there at least one song on Autechre's Tri Repetae++ that was
> made from lots of vocal samples chopped up into such tiny little bits that
> they're not even distinguishable as vocals?
yeh, "second scepe" from "anvil vapre" has bits of chopped up female
voices, and "piobmx" from "garbage" has more indistinguishable vocal
elements. and for absolute vocal tweek-ness, check out the "keynell" ep
by gescom on skam records. (gescom is a collab. btw. autechre and their
friends) sort of like harris' voice (or samples) on "logghi barogghi",
but far weirder and a bit better integrated into the tracks...
"chiastic slide" has some processed bits of voices thrown in as well.
np: richard h. kirk "lost souls on funk"
small words of sleep
VSVN ARAB wrote:
> Why do you think that music is secondary to lyrics in the importance
> of a piece of music!?
well, not to answer for the person to whom this question was posed, but
in standard popular music, and for most of its listeners, the music *is*
secondary to the lyrics. songwriters will often come up with a vocal,
and create the music as a filler behind it, just so the singer doesn't
sound silly singing all by her/his self. and many pop listeners fail to
notice what's going on behind the vocals, anyway.
i'm not sure if this also holds true to pop-based "industrial" vocal
bands; fla for example seem like the vocals are the last and
least-planned out step.
np: richard h. kirk "so digital"
daniel landherr
FS jake J (fsj...@aol.com) wrote:
: lyrics do not belong with good music. The whole time I was a skinny puppy
: fan I hated ogre's shit and loved cevins music. I was pretened to like the
: meaning and feeling of ogre's lyrics , but come on , they are horrible !!
They're a long way from horrible, leave that to the pop stars. In fact, I
think the lyrics to Tin Omen are brilliant. A perfect situation to use
the cut-up technique (describing a chaotic situation), and a great
description of Tien Amin Square, including a comparison (althought
limited) to the student uprising at Kent State.
: I just get sick & tired of people that can't be more open minded. When
: you listen to music your not suppose to feel someone elses pain or get
: angry towards the government. You are suppose to feel good and be
: entertained by the music itself.
: JMJ
Why the hell aren't you supposed to empathize with others or protest the
government? Why are you supposed to feel good? Music should be, and is,
used to communicate all kinds of emotions, thoughts, ideas, etc. Music
can be used to make you angry, sexually aroused, happy, irritated, etc.
Music can be cathartic. Music can be anything.
I'm sick of closed-minded people, too. I'm sick of people like you who
can't tolerate the way other people may want to use music.
Dan
badass industrial cyborf
.. i have most of coil's albums, some of them are beautiful..
horse rotavator, gold is the metal, and some of the instrumentals
from love's secret domain..
but coil's last album was a distraction in minimalism.. good,..
but not.. not structured enough for my tastes.
as for autechre.. i get the impression that while their music is innovative,
rhythmically especially.. but rather melodically simple..
which is fine.
but i want real melodic complexity. that's what i want to hear. and i
want to hear it performed on synthesizers.
i know, i know i should do what i want to hear myself.
i try.
but time is scarce with the engineering school..
badass industrial cyborf
but too confined to the same minor chords, slow, plodding..
i do like it.. but it's not..
not what i am searching for.
small words of sleep
to whom are you referring?
np: mu-ziq "approaching menace"
Morrigu198
Subject: Re: Pigface definition of "chill out" needs updating...
From: jrd...@unix.amherst.edu (VoltAire)
Date: 5 Sep 97 09:45:38 GMT
Message-id: <340fd...@amhnt2.amherst.edu>
>Morrigu198 (morri...@aol.com) wrote:
>: >Listen to Kalte Farben. Listen to Index. Listen to the new THD
>: >song.
>: And I still find it breathtakingly predictable and banal, but hey,
>: different strokes..
>Then maybe you can explain why you (or more importantly almost every one
>else)
>cAN't seems to be able to dance to it when it gets played in a club...
The last time I was clubbing I don't think Kalte Farben was on anyone's
set list...
You may be interested in knowing I haven't been to a club in over a year
and a half. I don't generally go clubbing because A-I'm pretty clumsy, and
beyond that I feel incredibly shy about dancing in public B-DJ's here in
Philly generally don't spin anything too fascinating, and dancing to about
1 song for an entire night spent ata club doesn't make it worth my time.
As to answer your question...Clubs are like that...people work out their
dance to Dig It (hey, it's going to be spun, they can be sure of that) and
other such club staples to have their nice "check me out, I'm dancing to
Godlike" routine. Spin something out of the static catalog of dance faves,
and people are likely to be dumbfounded.
-Ben
NP:Einsturzende Neubauten - DNS Wasserturn
LOgre2'3
>but coil's last album was a distraction in minimalism.. good,..
>but not.. not structured enough for my tastes.
Which one do you consider to be their last one? "Worship the Glitch"?
Patrick McGuirk
In article <340fd...@amhnt2.amherst.edu>,
VoltAire <jrd...@unix.amherst.edu> wrote:
>the DJ' played FLA's "the blade"...I was so amused by all the helpless looks
>of confusion from people who had just finished their pre-aranged dance to
>"join in the chant" that I started doing a little "I'm jesus and I'm nailed
>to a cross, but I'm dancing anyway" kind of dance....about 30 seconds later
>half the dance floor was following along, apparently pleased that someone
>knew how to properly dance to the song...ha!ha!
*applause* just what we need, industrial form dancing. I've long thought
dance clubs were dull for the mere fact that everyone seems to dance solo
or simulate sex with their partner. i can't dance worth a shit - I can
find the beat in anything, but I still am waaaaay too white (ducks thrown
food) and have no sense about jammin spontenously to the funky grooves. I
end up looking like Pee Wee Herman and people think I'm joking.
If you damn cool dancing people would form country-style line dancing, do
the occassional polka or waltz - I'd be clubbin it every night - just to
hear the beat.
Patrick
VSVN ARAB
jrd...@unix.amherst.edu (VoltAire) wrote:
>VSVN ARAB (vsvn...@3-cities.com) wrote:
>: When the year 3010 comes around they're passing around the newly
>: revised edition of Merriam-Webster's Music Appreciation to students, I
>: don't think Leatherstrip and :Wumpscut: will be there, however,
>: Autechre could be in it because they're doing things with their music
>: that will be remembered.
>Ha! Who are you kidding?? Autechre?? You know who'd be in there...THE
>PRODIGY......after all, everbody knows they're the epitomization of generation
>X electronica...don't you ever read Newsweek?? And can't we disperse
yeah, shame on me.
>with this whole "music that makes a difference/music that will be rembered"
it's hard to "disperse" with something while mentioning it at the same
time.
>slogan...it gets a bit tired....Autechre is very good, and has a great deal
blah blah blah. let's talk about nothing then shall we?
>of energy...but very little emotion (except for a handful of songs like
I could see how you might think that. The difference is that they
don't feel the need to bash you over the head like :W: or FLA.
They are subtle. It's not music for people who need to hear someone
screaming through distortion over a sixteenth note bassline in order
to get a feeling from their music.
>"second scepe")..its not the type of songs you look into your lovers eyes,
>or think about your dead parents to....I hate how people bash a band because
As if there's not already enough music out there suitable for "looking
into your lovers eyes."
I'm sure if they wanted to compose music for "looking into your lovers
eyes" then they would do that. But why?
There are more emotions out there besides love, hate, sadness, and joy
after all. Emotions that are not easily defineable and that you can't
really put into words.
>SOME of their material is generic, faceless EBM....I've heard people bitch
>about :W: and then be wooed by a song which , unknown to them, was :W:.
Great. good for them.
>Coil are geniuses...how many music textbooks are you ever going to see them in?
Probably not enough.
Flavius
>:I just get sick & tired of people that can't be more open minded. When
>:you listen to music your not suppose to feel someone elses pain or get
>:angry towards the government. You are suppose to feel good and be
>:entertained by the music itself.
HA! Tell that to Thin White Prick!
>says who? industrial music has never been about making you "feel good".
Yeah, but *some* of it HAS had the effect of making you feel good
because of the music alone. 242's Headhunter for example, and lots of FLA
songs. Oh yeah, and maybe I'm really WARPED but even SP's Spasmolytic makes me
feel good. I don't know if you can call Kraftwerk industrial, but all
their songs make me feel good. What makes you "feel good" is all relative.
Killing people makes serial killers feel good for example.
>the early industrial musicians set out to do exactly the opposite. if you
>really want instrumental feel good songs, i suggest checking out something
>by lawrence welk's orchestra. millions of nursing home residents can't be
>wrong.
Oh cut it out. The ULTIMATE "feel good" song on the planet is Smashing
Pumpkins "Today" song.
Flavius
badass industrial cyborf
> Which one do you consider to be their last one? "Worship the Glitch"?blacklight district, i thought...
is "glitch" coil or elph material?
LOgre2'3
On Sun, 07 Sep 1997 22:52:47 -0700, badass industrial cyborf
<cyb...@mail.ggg.net> wrote:
>blacklight district, i thought...
Well, I really don't consider that to be a "Coil" album.
>is "glitch" coil or elph material?
Coil vs. ELpH.